Inquiry into the Impact of Public Land Management Practices

RSCH.016.001.0204 

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE 

INQUIRY INTO THE 

IMPACT OF PUBLIC 

LAND MANAGEMENT 

PRACTICES ON 

BUSHFIRES IN VICTORIA 

JUNE 2008

RSCH.016.001.0205 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Committee 

Inquiry into the Impact of 

Public Land Management 

Practices on Bushfires in 

Victoria 

June 2008

RSCH.016.001.0206

RSCH.016.001.0207 

Inquiry into the Impact of 

Public Land Management 

Practices on Bushfires in 

Victoria 

Report of the Environment and Natural 

Resources Committee on the 

Inquiry into the Impact of Public Land 

Management Practices on Bushfires in 

Victoria 

Parliamentary Paper 

No. 116 Session 2006-2008 

ORDERED TO BE PRINTED 

Victorian Government Printer 2008 

i

RSCH.016.001.0208 

Parliament of Victoria 

Environment and Natural Resources Committee 

Inquiry into the Impact of Public Land Management Practices on Bushfires in Victoria 

ISBN 978-0-9757811-3-5 

This report is printed on 100% recycled paper.

RSCH.016.001.0209 

Table of Contents 

Committee Members .......................................................................................... vii 

The Environment and Natural Resources Committee ...................................... ix 

Terms of Reference ............................................................................................. xi 

Chair’s Foreword ........................................................................... xiii 

Executive Summary ........................................................................xv 

Table of Recommendations............................................................................ xxiii 

Table of Findings............................................................................................ xxvii 

Definitions and Acronyms .............................................................................. xxxi 

Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................... 1 

Background to the Inquiry ................................................................................... 1 

Inquiry Process....................................................................................................... 2 

Bushfire in Australia............................................................................................. 3 

Evolution of the Australian Biota through Fire......................................................... 3 

Aboriginal Use of Fire .......................................................................................... 6 

Historical and Scientific Evidence of pre-European Fire ......................................... 7 

Extent and Use of Fire............................................................................................ 9 

European Arrival and Use of Fire ......................................................................... 10 

Stakeholder Evidence........................................................................................... 11 

Conclusion............................................................................................................ 13 

Bushfire in Victoria............................................................................................. 14 

Significant Victorian Bushfires .............................................................................. 16 

Causes of Fire on Public Land.............................................................................. 22 

Recent Bushfire Inquiries...................................................................................... 23 

Inquiry Report ..................................................................................................... 24 

Chapter 2: Prescribed Burning in Victoria ..................................... 27 

Introduction......................................................................................................... 27 

Overview of prescribed burning ............................................................................ 28 

The history of fuel reduction burning..................................................................... 29 

Prescribed burning on public land ........................................................................ 29 

Burning on private land......................................................................................... 31 

Legislative and regulatory arrangements for prescribed burning ................. 32 

Legislation and the Code of Practice................................................................ 32 

iii

RSCH.016.001.0210 


Discussion ............................................................................................................ 37 

Delegations and reporting responsibilities ...................................................... 38 

Theoretical foundations ..................................................................................... 50 

Planning and conducting the burn......................................................................... 69 

The reporting process for prescribed burning................................................. 73 

The effectiveness of fuel reduction burning..................................................... 79 

The influence of fuel management zones......................................................... 81 

Measuring the effectiveness of fuel reduction and ecological burning .................. 83 

Environmental factors ........................................................................................ 84 

Water quality and quantity ................................................................................. 86 

The extent of prescribed burning on public land............................................. 90 

The historical extent of prescribed burning ..................................................... 90 

The current extent of prescribed burning......................................................... 91 

The required extent of prescribed burning....................................................... 91 

Prescribed burning in Western Australia............................................................... 92 

Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 93 

Targets and constraints ..................................................................................... 95 

Introduction......................................................................................................... 95 

Performance against targets.............................................................................. 96 

Constraints.......................................................................................................... 99 

Weather and climate ........................................................................................... 100 

Funding and personnel ....................................................................................... 101 

The risk of escaped burns................................................................................... 110 

Smoke................................................................................................................. 112 

Forestry and regeneration burning...................................................................... 114 

Alternatives to prescribed burning ................................................................. 116 

Chapter 3: Biodiversity and Flood ................................................ 117 

Introduction....................................................................................................... 117 

Biodiversity impacts......................................................................................... 118 

Introduction and background .............................................................................. 118 

Stakeholder evidence ......................................................................................... 123 

Discussion and conclusion.................................................................................. 125 

The Gippsland Flood ........................................................................................ 127 

Introduction and background .......................................................................... 127 

Environmental impact ......................................................................................... 130 

The impact of recent bushfires........................................................................ 132 

Background......................................................................................................... 132 



iv

RSCH.016.001.0211 

Chapter 4: Bushfire Suppression Infrastructure.......................... 139 

Introduction....................................................................................................... 139 

Roads, access tracks and signage ................................................................. 139 

Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 146 

Fire breaks and containment lines.................................................................. 146 

Introduction......................................................................................................... 146 


Large water points............................................................................................ 152 

Other suppression resources.......................................................................... 154 

Aerial Resources ................................................................................................ 154 

Remote sensing technology ............................................................................... 157 

Chapter 5: The Impact of Traditional Land Uses ........................ 161 

Introduction....................................................................................................... 161 

Overview of stakeholder evidence.................................................................. 161 

Introduction......................................................................................................... 161 


Discussion and conclusion ................................................................................. 168 

Timber harvesting............................................................................................. 169 

Grazing .............................................................................................................. 177 

Four wheel driving............................................................................................ 182 

Prospecting and mining................................................................................... 186 

Hunting .............................................................................................................. 188 

Camping ............................................................................................................ 189 

Apiary ................................................................................................................. 190 

Chapter 6: Community and Stakeholder Engagement................. 193 

Introduction....................................................................................................... 193 

Stakeholder evidence....................................................................................... 195 

Concerns and suggestions for improvement ...................................................... 195 

Support for the current approach to community engagement............................. 198 

The importance of community engagement........................................................ 199 

Discussion and findings...................................................................................... 200 

Community Engagement by DSE and its Partner Agencies ......................... 201 

Introduction......................................................................................................... 201 

The Code of Practice.......................................................................................... 202 

Fire Management Plans...................................................................................... 202 

Fire Operations Plans ......................................................................................... 203 

The Country Fire Authority .............................................................................. 209 

Resources and programs ................................................................................... 210 

v

RSCH.016.001.0212 


The interface between public and private land .............................................. 213 

Introduction and background .......................................................................... 213 

Farming properties in the interface................................................................. 214 

A shared zone of management........................................................................... 214 

Fencing compensation........................................................................................ 216 

Residential properties in the interface............................................................ 220 


Integrated Fire Management Planning ............................................................ 222 

The media .......................................................................................................... 225 

Chapter 7: Climate Change and Bushfire ..................................... 227 

Introduction....................................................................................................... 227 

What is Climate Change ................................................................................... 228 

Climate Change Trends and Predictions ........................................................ 230 

International ........................................................................................................ 230 

Australia.............................................................................................................. 231 

Victoria................................................................................................................ 233 

Response........................................................................................................... 238 

The Climate Change Debate ............................................................................ 239 

Predicted Climate Change Impact on Bushfire Prevention and Suppression 

............................................................................................................................ 240 

Stakeholder Views ............................................................................................ 244 

Government Response..................................................................................... 246 

Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................ 251 

Appendix 2 ........................................................................................................ 259 

Appendix 3 ........................................................................................................ 267 

Appendix 4 ........................................................................................................ 280 

Appendix 5 ........................................................................................................ 281 

vi

RSCH.016.001.0213 

Committee Members 

This Inquiry was conducted during the term of the 56 th Parliament. The 

Members of the Environment and Natural Resources Committee are: 

Staff 

Hon John Pandazopoulos MP (Chair); 

Mr Craig Ingram, MP (Deputy Chair); 

Ms Joanne Duncan, MP; 

Mrs Christine Fyffe, MP; 

Ms Tammy Lobato, MP; 

Mrs Donna Petrovich, MP; 

Mr Matthew Viney, MP; and 

Mr Peter Walsh, MP. 

For this Inquiry, the Committee was supported by a Secretariat comprising: 

Executive Officer: 

Mr Derek Benjamin 

Ms Caroline Williams (March - July 2007) 

Research Officer: 

Mr Nathan Bunt 

Research Assistant: Mr Michael Pescott (July – October 2007) 

Administrative Officer: Ms Jane Phelan 

vii

RSCH.016.001.0214

RSCH.016.001.0215 

The Environment and Natural Resources 

Committee 

The Victorian Parliamentary Environment and Natural Resources Committee 

is constituted under the Parliamentary Committees Act 2003, as amended. 

The Committee comprises eight Members of Parliament drawn from both 

houses and all parties. 

Its functions under the Act are to inquire into, consider and report to the 

Parliament on any proposal, matter or thing concerned with – 

1. the environment; 

2. natural resources; 

3. planning the use, development or protection of land. 

Committee Address 

Address: 

Telephone: (03) 8682 2803 

Facsimile: (03) 8682 2818 

Email: 

Internet: 

Parliament House, Spring Street 

Melbourne, Victoria 3000 

enrc@parliament.vic.gov.au 

http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/enrc 

ix

RSCH.016.001.0216

RSCH.016.001.0217 

Terms of Reference 

The Legislative Council under section 33 of the Parliamentary Committees 

Act 2003 refers Terms of Reference requiring: 

That the Environment and Natural Resources Committee inquire into and 

report upon the impact of public land management practices on the 

frequency, scale and intensity of bushfires in Victoria, and in particular — 

1. the extent, timing, resourcing and effectiveness of prescribed burning 

on both crown and freehold land; 

2. the manner in which prescribed burning is conducted, including how 

applicable codes of practice are employed; 

3. the impact of prescribed burning and recent wildfires on Victoria’s 

biodiversity, wildlife and other natural assets including water quality 

and quantity; 

4. the reporting process applicable to prescribed burning programs; 

5. the legislative and regulatory arrangements for prescribed burns and 

bushfire management; 

6. the effectiveness of maintaining permanent, strategically placed fire 

breaks and containment lines throughout public land areas; 

7. the provision and maintenance of large water points on crown land to 

assist with bushfire aerial taskforce operations; 

8. the impact of traditional land uses such as timber harvesting, grazing, 

four-wheel-driving, hunting, camping, mining and prospecting on the 

scale and intensity of bushfires and the ability of relevant agencies to 

respond; 

9. the provision and maintenance of serviceable access tracks and 

signage to assist with recreational and emergency requirements; 

10. the impact of climate change on bushfires and public land 

management practices; 

11. whether additional measures are required to provide a mechanism for 

the skills, knowledge and interests of local communities, and 

appropriate scientific expertise, to be better represented in the 

management of bushfire risk on public land; 

12. the involvement of local communities in the management of fire; and 

13. any other matter that impacts on the scale and intensity of bushfires 

in Victoria. 

xi

RSCH.016.001.0218 


On 18 July 2007, Legislative Council under section 33 of the Parliamentary 

Committees Act 2003 amended the terms of reference to include: 

14. the consequent impact of bushfires on the June/July 2007 Gippsland 

flood. 

The Committee is required to report to Parliament by 30 June 2008. 

xii

RSCH.016.001.0219 

Chair’s Foreword 

I am pleased to present the Environment and Natural Resources 

Committee’s report on its Inquiry into the Impact of Public Land 

Management Practices on Bushfires in Victoria. 

Bushfire is a natural part of the Australian environment, with many 

ecological systems dependent upon fire for ecosystem health and 

biodiversity. However, the 2002/03 and 2006/07 Victorian bushfires were, as 

described by numerous witnesses, unnatural, and resulted in a level of 

destruction that will take the bush decades to recover from. The devastation 

caused by these bushfires is something that no Victorian ever wants to see 

again. 

While I have previously been involved in several Parliamentary Inquiries, the 

level of interest generated by this Inquiry has been exceptional. The 

Committee received: 257 submissions; 719 proforma submissions; and 

evidence from 202 witnesses representing 139 organisations at 17 public 

hearings. On behalf of the Committee I would like to warmly thank all those 

people who have shared their time and knowledge with the Committee, 

particularly those who took the time to impart their personal and family 

experiences in dealing with the impacts of bushfire. The Committee 

appreciates these insights and has found them invaluable in preparing this 

report. In addition, the Committee would also like to extend its gratitude to 

those who took time out of their lives to assist Members in undertaking site 

visits throughout Victoria and Western Australia. The ability to see “first 

hand” the impacts of bushfires, and the land management techniques used 

to mitigate their impacts, has been invaluable in illustrating and 

understanding the complexity of this issue. 

The Recommendations and Findings presented in this report have been 

supported by all Members of the Committee. The report contains 20 

Recommendations and 17 Findings that the Committee believes will 

significantly contribute to: mitigating the effects of future bushfire events, 

such as those experienced in 2002/03 and 2006/07; promoting improved 

ecological management of our public lands; and ensuring improved 

community engagement in bushfire management processes. While 

Government and non-Government Members alike agree that the efforts by 

every individual involved in fire suppression and fire prevention are to be 

applauded, the overwhelming view of the Committee is that the 

management of our public lands can, and must, be improved. In particular, 

the Committee recognises that the Department of Sustainability and 

Environment must significantly increase the level of prescribed burning to 

mitigate the impact of future bushfires. 

xiii

RSCH.016.001.0220 


I would like to express my thanks to my fellow Committee Members for their 

contributions to this Inquiry – Mr Craig Ingram MP (Deputy Chair), Ms 

Joanne Duncan MP, Mrs Christine Fyffe MP, Ms Tammy Lobato MP, Mr 

Peter Walsh MP, Mrs Donna Petrovich MP and Mr Matthew Viney MP. 

Finally, on behalf of the Members of the Committee, I wish to express my 

appreciation to the Secretariat staff for their acumen, advice, support and 

diligence throughout this Inquiry – Mr Nathan Bunt, Ms Jane Phelan, Dr 

Caroline Williams, Mr Michael Pescott and Mr Derek Benjamin. 

The Hon John Pandazopoulos MP 

Chair 

xiv

RSCH.016.001.0221 

Executive Summary 

Chapter 1 – Introduction 

The Committee received the Terms of Reference for the Inquiry into the 

Impact of Public Land Management Practices on Bushfires in Victoria on 14 

March 2007. The Committee received 257 written submissions; 719 

proforma submissions; held 17 public hearings; and participated in 18 site 

visits and briefings. 

Fire is a fundamental part of Australia’s natural environment, history and 

culture. Many Australian ecological systems are dependent upon some form 

of “fire regime” to maintain ecosystem health and biodiversity, while 

organisations such as the Country Fire Authority have become an integral 

part of Victorian rural culture. 

The use of fire in the landscape by Aborigines prior to European settlement 

is increasingly acknowledged by scientists and commentators. Today it is 

generally accepted that Aboriginal burning of the landscape was not only 

used for cultural and religious purposes, but also to deliberately manipulate 

the function of ecosystems. However, the extent to which Aboriginal people 

used fire is contentious and remains a topic of debate among pre-historians, 

scientists and anthropologists. 

Contemporary Australian knowledge of bushfire has evolved significantly 

since the arrival of the first European settlers. Land managers now use fire 

as a tool in primary production, in biodiversity conservation, and in the 

protection of life and assets. In particular, the use of fire by forest managers 

has evolved from a focus on suppression alone, to the use of fire, 

particularly prescribed burning, as a land management tool. 

However, despite an evolving knowledge of fire, Victoria has still 

experienced over 34 significant fires since 1851 with approximately twothirds 

of these fires occurring since the 1950s. On average, Victoria 

experiences over 600 bushfires every year on public land with lightning and 

arson accounting for over half of the fires which occur on public land, though 

lightning accounts for almost half of the total area burnt on public land. 

Chapter 2 – Prescribed Burning in Victoria 

Prescribed burning is the practice of lighting fires, under specified 

conditions, to achieve the following land management objectives: fuel 

reduction to assist in the control of bushfires; the conservation and 

management of flora and fauna; and the re-regeneration of forest following 

commercial harvesting operations. There is general consensus within 

Australian and international literature that prescribed burning does 

contribute to bushfire suppression, though its effectiveness is difficult to 

quantify. 

xv

RSCH.016.001.0222 


The legislative and regulatory arrangements governing prescribed burning, 

primarily administered by the Department of Sustainability and Environment 

(DSE), are complex, with several stakeholders noting that this complexity 

hinders prescribed burning activities. While a degree of complexity appears 

inevitable if the risks and benefits of prescribed burning are to be 

appropriately balanced, the Committee considers that a flexible approach to 

conducting prescribed burning is essential. 

The majority of stakeholders argued that the current targeted level of 

prescribed burning, approximately 130,000 hectares per annum, undertaken 

by DSE and its partner agencies is insufficient to mitigate the impacts of 

future bushfires and provide the level of fire needed to promote healthy 

ecological outcomes. The Committee agrees with these stakeholders and 

recommends a significant increase in the level of prescribed burning to 

mitigate the risks associated with future bushfires. 

A major reason for the debate surrounding the appropriate extent of 

prescribed burning on public land is the level of concern within the 

community about its perceived environmental impacts. For example, a 

number of stakeholders expressed concerns that current levels and 

methods of prescribed burning on public land are harmful to the 

environment. Conversely, other stakeholders argued that Victoria’s 

biodiversity is threatened by the infrequency of current fire regimes. 

Inadequate resource allocation, particularly of personnel, was cited by a 

number of stakeholders as a constraint on the level of prescribed burning. A 

related argument was that there has been a loss, from DSE in particular, of 

the knowledge required to maintain an adequate broad-scale prescribed 

burning program. The Committee concurs with these stakeholders and 

recommends a substantial increase in funding to engage skilled fire 

management personnel dedicated to undertaking prescribed burning 

activities. 

The Committee notes that its recommendation for a 

substantial increase in prescribed/ecological burning may 

have a significant impact on the community and require a 

cultural change in some community attitudes. It believes 

this increased level of prescribed burning will be of such 

benefit to the environment and the Victorian community that 

a unified commitment to promoting this change is essential. 

xvi

RSCH.016.001.0223 

Chapter 3 – Biodiversity and Flood 

The bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 affected a combined area of 

approximately 2.3 million hectares (1.19 million and 1.05 million hectares of 

public land respectively). While a full analysis of the ecological damage 

caused by the 2006/07 fires has yet to be completed, a significant amount of 

work has been undertaken for the 2002/03 fires. This work has significantly 

contributed to the formation of the Committee’s findings and 

recommendations. 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE noted that the impact of fires on parks 

and forests is “generally not unnatural or catastrophic” and that large 

bushfires burning during very dry conditions “are both natural and 

inevitable”. DSE referred to the “fire regime” as the key determinant of the 

influence of fire on ecosystem health and stated that the biodiversity 

implications of the recent fires will depend on future fire events, and the 

potential impacts of climate change. 

Uncertainty regarding the long-term biodiversity impacts of the recent 

bushfires was noted by stakeholders. However, a significant number of 

stakeholders argued that the short term biodiversity impacts of the recent 

bushfires were severe and may also pose significant threats to biodiversity 

in the long term. 

The Committee received evidence that prescribed burning has a relatively 

benign impact on biodiversity in comparison to large and intense bushfires 

of the kind experienced in 2002/03 and 2006/07. A large number of 

stakeholders also identified current land management practices, including 

insufficient prescribed burning, as having caused, or contributed to, the 

scale and intensity of the recent bushfires. 

On balance, the Committee finds it is likely that the bushfires of 2002/03 and 

2006/07 were both the result, and the most recent examples, of 

inappropriate fire regimes. The inherent risk to Victoria’s biodiversity posed 

by bushfires of the scale and intensity of those experienced in 2002/03 and 

2006/07 is one that must be mitigated. The Committee finds that an increase 

in prescribed burning across the landscape represents the best strategy for 

managing the risks that future bushfires pose to biodiversity and other 

natural assets. 

The Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 caused extensive damage to homes, 

businesses, farm land, a range of public and private assets, and imposed 

further hardship on a community still recovering from the 2006/07 bushfires. 

The flood also caused significant environmental damage including erosion, 

sedimentation, and threats to aquatic biodiversity. 

The Committee recognises that floods are a natural phenomenon and play 

an important role in maintaining ecosystem health and that the rainfall event 

which preceded the flood was likely to have made a significant contribution 

to the flood. However, the Committee finds that the scale and intensity of the 

xvii

RSCH.016.001.0224 


Gippsland floods and its environmental impacts were clearly exacerbated by 

the preceding bushfires and a lack of prescribed burning. 

Chapter 4 – Bushfire Suppression Infrastructure 

The Committee received a significant amount of evidence from stakeholders 

regarding the provision and maintenance of serviceable access tracks and 

signage for recreational and emergency requirements. A range of 

stakeholders stated that the existing access track network on public land 

was insufficiently maintained and had become overgrown with vegetation in 

many areas. In addition, the Committee was informed that some tracks were 

substandard, inappropriately signed and unsuitable for larger fire vehicles. 

Stakeholders were broadly divided on the effectiveness of permanent and 

strategically placed fire breaks and containment lines throughout public land. 

Concerns regarding the financial cost of firebreak construction, 

maintenance, and the potential impacts on the environment and water 

quality, were also prominent in the evidence received by the Committee. 

The importance of water points was almost universally acknowledged by 

stakeholders, who typically noted that water points reduce fire-fighting turn 

around times for both aircraft and ground-based crew, thereby maximising 

the time spent at the fire edge. In addition, a number of stakeholders were 

critical of instances where the Government had decided not to replace water 

taken from some domestic and farm supplies during recent fire suppression 

operations. 

Witnesses to the Inquiry noted the importance and necessity of aircraft use, 

particularly for rapid attack. Many witnesses agreed that aircraft were 

important in fire suppression, witnesses also noted that aerial resources 

should not be viewed as a bushfire panacea. 

Chapter 5 – The Impact of Traditional Land Uses 

xviii 

A significant number of stakeholders expressed the view that access to 

public land had been increasingly restricted over recent decades, resulting 

in: increased fuel loads in forested areas; the loss of valuable sources of 

local knowledge; the loss of firefighting experience and equipment; and a 

decline in the condition of, and access to, vehicle tracks. 

Conversely, some stakeholders questioned the view that the restriction of 

particular traditional uses on public land had adversely impacted land and 

fire management in Victoria. These stakeholders were notably critical of the 

view that timber harvesting and grazing also serve as bushfire mitigation 

strategies. 

The Committee considers that there has been a significant decline in 

traditional land uses on public land in recent decades. While it is difficult to 

determine whether this decline has had an impact on the severity of 

bushfires, the Committee finds that the decline has had an obvious impact

RSCH.016.001.0225 

on the ability of relevant agencies to respond to bushfires, primarily due to 

the loss of a permanent workforce in forest areas. 

The reduction of timber harvesting on public land in recent decades was 

commonly identified by stakeholders as having negative implications for 

bushfire severity and the ability of agencies to respond. Many stakeholders 

expressed the view that the decline of the workforce previously engaged in 

timber harvesting and forest management, and the associated vehicle 

access tracks and heavy machinery that it had maintained, had significantly 

compromised bushfire prevention and suppression. 

The Committee received evidence from a significant number of stakeholders 

who argued in favour of grazing on public land as an effective fuel reduction 

tool. A number of these stakeholders were particularly critical of the 

Government’s decision in 2005 to end grazing in Victoria’s Alpine National 

Park and argued that this had contributed to an increase in fuel loads and 

the severity of recent bushfires. The Committee notes the scientific evidence 

that grazing may not be an effective or preferable bushfire mitigation 

strategy on its own but believes that in certain circumstances, grazing can 

be used as a tool to complement other fuel reduction strategies on public 

land. 

The Committee received submissions from a number of Victorian Four 

Wheel Drive clubs, each of which argued that four wheel driving has a 

positive impact on bushfire prevention and suppression, primarily by 

ensuring that access tracks are maintained and remain open for bushfire 

suppression. However, the view that four wheel drive access is of benefit to 

bushfire prevention and suppression was not universally shared. Some 

stakeholders argued that four-wheel driving results in damage to tracks 

which are required for bushfire suppression, and that four wheel driving has 

the potential to impact on water quality through increased erosion. 

The views of other traditional land users such as hunters, campers, 

prospectors and miners and apiarists were also received and considered by 

the Committee. The Committee notes that these land uses had no 

discernable positive or negative impact on the scale or intensity of bushfires, 

and that they play an important role in sustaining the network of vehicle 

access tracks used in fire suppression. 

Chapter 6 – Community and Stakeholder Engagement 

The importance of effective community engagement in the management of 

public land for the prevention and suppression of bushfires was emphasised 

by the vast majority of stakeholders. While a number of stakeholders were 

supportive of the current community engagement approaches by land 

management agencies, a significant number of stakeholders were also 

critical of the limited extent to which the agencies incorporated local input 

into both fire prevention and suppression practices. 

xix

RSCH.016.001.0226 


The Committee finds that in relation to land and fire management, there is a 

need to improve the current standard of community and stakeholder 

engagement by DSE and its partner agencies. Improvements are required to 

ensure: greater transparency; continuous information transfer between DSE 

and stakeholders; and to increase opportunities and mechanisms available 

for stakeholder input. 

The Committee identifies that there is significant potential to increase 

community input into bushfire policy and planning through existing and 

emerging resources and programs. The Integrated Fire Management 

Planning (IFMP) framework is notable in this regard, with a number of 

stakeholders expressing confidence in the potential of the IFMP framework 

to increase the input of local knowledge into fire planning. Accordingly, the 

Committee recommends that the Government, and responsible agencies, 

expedite the implementation of the IFMP framework. 

Several stakeholders asserted that private landholders had received an 

inadequate level of Government assistance for the repair and replacement 

of fences along the boundary between public and private land following the 

recent bushfires. Concerns were also expressed that fencing compensation 

arrangements following the recent fires lacked certainty and consistency. 

The Committee is mindful of the need for greater certainty, consistency and 

clarity in the Government response to fencing and other assistance following 

damage from bushfires, bushfire suppression and prescribed burning. To 

this end, the Committee recommends that an ongoing Bushfire Fencing 

Policy which represents a shared commitment to fencing should be 

developed. 

Chapter 7 – Climate Change and Bushfire 

While Australia is a relatively small greenhouse gas emitter by international 

standards, the potential impacts of climate change nevertheless pose a 

significant risk to Australians. For example, scientific evidence suggests that 

climate change in Australia may lead to an increase in the frequency and 

intensity of bushfires. 

The Committee is cognisant that though apparently diminishing, there 

remains a level of scientific debate regarding the extent and causes, 

anthropogenic or otherwise, of climate change. However, based on the 

overwhelming majority of scientific evidence, the Committee supports the 

notion that the climate is changing, and is predicted to worsen in the future. 

Scientific projections indicate that south east Australia is likely to experience 

warmer, drier and longer summers in the future and that this is likely to 

increase the frequency and intensity of fire weather and bushfires. Possible 

impacts include: a change to the distribution and composition of 

ecosystems; and a lowering of the yield and quality of water from fireaffected 

catchments. 

xx

RSCH.016.001.0227 

While not the dominant theme emerging from the evidence provided to the 

Inquiry, climate change did emerge as a concern for a range of 

stakeholders. While a large number of stakeholders argued that climate 

change posed a threat to the management of public land, a small number of 

stakeholders also strongly disagreed with the notion of climate change, 

particularly anthropogenic climate change, arguing that the perceived effects 

associated with climate change are in fact cyclical weather patterns. 

Despite this divergence of views on the extent and causes of climate 

change, a theme which was common to most stakeholder groups was that 

public land management needed to be improved to mitigate the future 

impact of bushfire. In this regard, the Committee concurs with those 

stakeholders and finds that prescribed burning is a key measure by which to 

mitigate the risks and impacts posed by climate change associated bushfire. 

xxi

RSCH.016.001.0228

RSCH.016.001.0229 

Table of Recommendations 

PAGE 

Recommendation 2.1:..............................................................................................79 

That the Department of Sustainability and Environment implement remote sensing 

imagery as a routine part of its pre-burn and post-burn assessment process for 

prescribed burning. Maps of every prescribed burn should be produced in a similar 

format to those used in Western Australia, indicating the boundary of each burn and 

the varying fire intensities achieved within the burn area. The boundaries of all Fuel 

Management Zones within each burn should also be indicated. 

Each prescribed burn map should be made publicly available on the Department of 

Sustainability and Environment’s website, together with a map of the same burn area 

which shows the pre-burn fuel hazard levels and a statement of the total area treated 

within each Fuel Management Zone by each prescribed burn. 


That in order to enhance the protection of community and ecological assets, the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment increase its annual prescribed burning 

target from 130,000 hectares to 385,000 hectares. This should be treated as a rolling 

target, with any shortfalls to be made up in subsequent years. 


A comprehensive review of the effectiveness of the increased prescribed burning 

target in meeting ecological and bushfire suppression needs should be conducted 

every three years. 


The Department of Sustainability and Environment should report its performance 

against the increased prescribed burning target in its annual report, which should also 

include the following details: 

• the total area treated within each fuel management zone for each region; 

• the total number of burns conducted within each fuel management zone for 

each region; and 

• the extent to which planned ecological and fuel reduction outcomes were 

met for prescribed burns within each fuel management zone for each 

region (e.g. a summary of the results of the post-burn assessments to be 

conducted in accordance with recommendation 2.3 above). 

xxiii

RSCH.016.001.0230 


Recommendation 2.5:............................................................................................105 

That the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Department of Primary 

Industries, Parks Victoria & VicForests separately cost, and report, annual 

expenditure on fuel reduction burning, ecological burning and regeneration burning in 

their Annual Reports. 


That the Victorian Government establish a five year rolling fund which allows unused 

prescribed burning monies to be rolled over into future financial years for the purpose 

of subsequent prescribed burning activities. 


That the Victorian Government provide recurring funding for a significant increase in 

regionally-based, permanent, or long-tenured, fire management personnel dedicated 

to the prescribed burning program. The increase in personnel should be consistent 

with the level required to achieve an annual prescribed burning target of 385,000 

hectares. 

The pool of available personnel should be suitably diverse and possess a wide variety 

of disciplines and skill sets, including practical skills. The Department of Sustainability 

and Environment and its partner agencies should also increase the proportion of 

personnel with specialist tertiary qualifications, including fire behaviour specialists, 

forest scientists, landscape ecologists and conservation biologists. 

The Department of Environment and Sustainability and its partner agencies should 

also prioritise the development of programs to reduce the level of staff turnover and 

the problem of the ageing workforce, through more effective succession planning. 


That the Victorian Government replace or compensate for water taken from domestic, 

stock and irrigation dams, or water needed for essential use, in the event of a fire, 

regardless of where the bushfire starts. 


That the Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner agencies 

conduct or commission research, and a possible trial study, to determine the potential 

of thinning and other silvicultural practices – whether alone or in combination with 

prescribed burning – as a means of reducing fuel loads and as a bushfire 

management strategy in Victoria’s forests. 


That the Victorian Government expedite the implementation of its 2006 election 

commitment to provide four wheel drive clubs with access to management vehicle 

only tracks. 

xxiv

RSCH.016.001.0231 

Recommendation 5.3:............................................................................................ 191 

That the Victorian Government consider all available means, consistent with 

conservation values, for substantially increasing the access of apiarists to the public 

land estate. 


That in relation to Fire Operations Plans, the Department Sustainability and 

Environment extends the number of community meetings during the public 

consultation period to a minimum of one meeting for each Fire District, with the 

possibility of repeat visits to particular areas. 


That finalised Fire Operations Plans be made publicly available in their entirety (with 

the exception of any private information) on the Department of Sustainability and 

Environment’s website and in hard-copy, and that this requirement be clearly stated in 

future Codes of Practice. This should include the “district burns list”, or its future 

equivalents, and a map which shows the corresponding burns for each Fire District. 

Each map should be provided in a format which can be downloaded directly from the 

Department’s website without the need for further data manipulation by the user. An 

identical hardcopy version of the map for each Fire District should be also be 

available to members of the public on request and free of charge. 


That the details of any variation or amendment of a Fire Operations Plan, including: 

the carrying forward or postponement of burns within the three-year period covered 

by a Fire Operations Plan; the carry over, removal or rescheduling of burns between 

past, present and future Fire Operations Plans; and the alteration of burn boundaries 

(including alterations of less than 25 per cent); should appear on the Department of 

Sustainability and Environment’s website at the time of the change and be included in 

the Fire Operations Plan for the following year. 


That all information pertaining to current and planned prescribed burns be published 

more prominently on the Department of Sustainability and Environment’s website, 

with a single prominent link to this material on the website homepage. 


That a process of year round community engagement in the preparation of Fire 

Operations Plans be established. In addition a record of year round community 

engagement, as contained in the Gippsland Fire Operations Plan, should be a 

requirement of all Fire Operations Plans. 

xxv

RSCH.016.001.0232 



That the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework establish zones in the 

interface between public and private land in which bushfire risk management is the 

shared responsibility of the Victorian Government and private landholders. 


That the Victorian Government establish a clear and consistent Bushfire Fencing 

Policy for damage caused by all future bushfires and prescribed burns. The Bushfire 

Fencing Policy should include the following provisions: 

• the Government contribute half the cost of replacing or repairing for fencing 

on the boundary between public and private land that is destroyed or 

damaged by a fire which has emerged from public land, but only where the 

cost of replacement or repair was not otherwise recoverable; 

• the Government pay a contribution, of up to 100 per cent, of the cost of 

restoring fences or other assets destroyed or damaged by backburning 

conducted during fire suppression operations; 

• the Government will pay the full cost of fences or other assets destroyed or 

damaged if prescribed burns on public land escape onto private land; 

• the Government will pay the full cost of rehabilitation of fire control lines on 

private property established by the Country Fire Authority or the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment during wildfire suppression 

activity for fire originating on public land ; and 

• the Government will pay the full cost of repairing or replacing fences on 

private land that are damaged or destroyed by machinery used in 

controlling bushfires that originate on public land. 


That the Victorian Government, and responsible agencies, expedite the 

implementation of the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework. 

That the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework integrate, as far as 

possible, fire management planning at the municipal level with both Fire Protection 

Plans (or their future equivalents) and Fire Operations Plans. 


That the Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner agencies 

continue to develop a proactive approach to engagement with the local and wider 

media to achieve continuous improvement in the standard of community information 

and education. 

xxvi

RSCH.016.001.0233 

Table of Findings 

PAGE 

Finding 2.1:...............................................................................................................49 

The Committee finds that while the legislative, regulatory and reporting structures for 

the planning and conduct of prescribed burning activities are complex, they provide 

an appropriate system of risk management for an inherently complex land 

management practice. 

Finding 2.2:...............................................................................................................86 

The Committee finds that the frequency and extent of prescribed burning has been 

insufficient, over a number of decades, for the preservation of ecological processes 

and biodiversity across the public land estate. An increase in the extent and 

frequency of prescribed burning for the enhancement of environmental values should 

therefore be a priority for the Department of Environment and Sustainability and its 

partner agencies. 

Finding 2.3:...............................................................................................................90 

The Committee finds that there is a need for an increase in the extent and frequency 

of prescribed burning in catchment areas to mitigate the risks associated with future 

bushfires. 

Finding 2.4:.............................................................................................................116 

The Committee finds that there is no evidence of an adverse impact by forestry 

operations on the level of prescribed burning. 

Finding 3.1:.............................................................................................................126 

The bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 were of a scale, intensity and frequency which 

resulted in an immediate and severe impact on Victoria’s biodiversity. 

Finding 3.2:.............................................................................................................126 

The scale and intensity of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires were the result of 

inappropriate fire regimes, and in particular, of an insufficient level of landscape-scale 

prescribed burning. 

Finding 3.3:.............................................................................................................126 

An increase in prescribed burning across the landscape, as recommended in Chapter 

Two, in a manner which mimics natural fire regimes, represents the most appropriate 

strategy for minimising the immediate and long-term threats to biodiversity from large 

and intense bushfires. 

xxvii

RSCH.016.001.0234 


Finding 3.4:.............................................................................................................138 

That the bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 significantly exacerbated, and contributed 

to the extent of the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007. 

Finding 3.5:.............................................................................................................138 

That previous land management practices, in particular an insufficient level of 

prescribed burning at a landscape-scale contributed to the scale and intensity of the 

2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires, thereby increasing the severity of the recent flood 

and its environmental impacts. 

Finding 3.6:.............................................................................................................138 

That flood risk management is dependent on effective bushfire risk management. 

Accordingly, an increased level of prescribed burning across the landscape – to 

regenerate the natural mosaic of burnt and unburnt vegetation which prevents 

excessive run-off from rainfall events – is integral to mitigating the risk of severe 

floods of the kind experienced by Gippsland in June/July 2007. 

Finding 5.1:.............................................................................................................168 

That the decline in local knowledge, skill, resources and infrastructure associated with 

the restriction of traditional land uses has had a negative impact on the ability of 

relevant agencies to manage fire on public land. 

Finding 5.2:.............................................................................................................174 

That the reduction in the extent of timber harvesting on public land and associated 

loss of local knowledge and expertise, machinery available for fire prevention and 

suppression, and a decline in the number and accessibility of vehicle access tracks 

has had a negative impact on land and fire management, particularly the bushfire 

suppression capacity of relevant agencies. 

Finding 6.1:.............................................................................................................201 

The Committee finds that there is a need to improve the standard of community and 

stakeholder engagement by the Department of Sustainability and Environment and its 

partner agencies in land and fire management, in order to create a culture of 

continuous engagement. Measures to achieve this should include: 

• greater transparency and accountability within the Department of 

Sustainability and Environment and its partner agencies; 

• an increased emphasis on continuously informing stakeholders and the 

community of, and the reasons for, specific land and fire management 

activities; and 

• an increase in the opportunities and mechanisms for stakeholder and 

community input. 

xxviii

RSCH.016.001.0235 

Finding 6.2:.............................................................................................................213 

That the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework, Country Fire Authority 

community meetings and the expansion of the Country Fire Authority’s “Community 

Fireguard”, have significant potential to increase community input into the planning 

and policy development for bushfire prevention and suppression, including prescribed 

burning. 

Finding 7.1:.............................................................................................................243 

That to lessen the impact of more frequent and intense fires, as predicted by climate 

change projections, a substantial and sustained increase in resources to conduct 

preventive activities will be needed. 

Finding 7.2:.............................................................................................................244 

An increase in landscape scale prescribed burning, as recommended in Chapter Two, 

represents the key strategy for minimising the fire risks associated with climate 

change. 

Finding 7.3:.............................................................................................................249 

In order to minimise the future risk of fire and facilitate the development of appropriate 

fire regimes, key bushfire management documents, for example, the Code of Practice 

and Fire Ecology Strategies, need to explicitly consider, and if necessary, incorporate, 

the potential impacts of climate change on bushfire. 

xxix

RSCH.016.001.0236

RSCH.016.001.0237 

Definitions and Acronyms 

AIIMS-ICS 

Backburn 

Blacking Out 

Burn Plan 

Burning Program 

Burning Rotation 

Bushfire 

Chief Officer Fire 

and Emergency 

Management 

Code of Practice for 

Fire Management on 

Public Land (the 

Code) 

Control Line 

Controlled Burning 

Country Area of 

Victoria 

Country Fire 

Authority (CFA) 

Crown Land 

Australian Interagency Incident Management System - Incident 

Control System. A nationally adopted structure to formalise a coordinated 

approach by all agencies involved in the management of 

an emergency. The Incident Control System is a major subsystem. 

A fire lit along the inner edge of a control line to consume the fuel in 

the path of a wildfire. 

The process of extinguishing or removing burning material along or 

near the fire control line, felling stags, trenching logs to prevent 

rolling, and the like, in order to make the fire safe. See also 

Mopping Up. 

A DSE plan used to gain approval for the conduct of a prescribed 

burn. 

All the prescribed burns scheduled for a designated area over a 

nominated period of time. 

The period between re-burning of a prescribed area for 

management purposes. 

A term used to describe an unplanned fire burning in predominantly 

native vegetation. 

DSE officer responsible for fire planning, prevention and operations 

on public land in Victoria. Previously referred to as Chief Fire 

Officer. 

Provides the framework for fire management procedure and practice 

on public land in Victoria, with appropriate links to private land. The 

2006 Code has replaced the 1995 Code, though transition between 

the Codes has not yet been completed. 

See Fire Control Line. 

See Prescribed Burning. 

A legislative term defined by Section 3 of the Country Fire Authority 

Act 1958, it includes all that part of the State outside the 

Metropolitan Fire District that is not Fire Protected Area. 

The agency responsible for fire prevention and suppression in the 

Country Area of Victoria. 

Land which is, or is deemed to be, un-alienated land of the Crown. 

It includes: 

1. Land of the Crown reserved permanently or temporarily or set 

aside by or under an Act; 

2. Land of the Crown occupied by a person under a lease, license or 

other right; 

xxxi

RSCH.016.001.0238 


3. Land of the Crown managed by a public authority other than DSE 

or the Secretary; and 

4. Land of the Crown which is, or is part of, a National Park or a 

park within a meaning of the National Parks Act 1975. 

DHS 

DPI 

Department of 

Sustainability and 

Environment (DSE) 

Ecological Burning 

Ecology Fire 

Strategy 

Emergency Coordination 

Centre 

(ECC) 

Fire Access Road 

Fire Access Track 

Fire Agencies 

Fire Behaviour 

Fire Break 

Fire Control Line 

Fire Danger Index 

(FDI) 

Fire Danger Period 

Department of Human Services. 

Department of Primary Industries. 

The agency responsible for the prevention and suppression of fire in 

the fire protected area. 

A form of prescribed burning. Treatment with fire of vegetation in 

nominated areas to achieve specified ecological objectives. 

A strategy prepared by the relevant land manager to address the 

appropriate use or exclusion of fire at a landscape scale. Now 

referred to as Fire Ecology Strategies. 

A facility from which a strategic response to emergencies is 

coordinated. 

A track constructed and/or maintained for fire management 

purposes, which is generally of a standard adequate for all-weather 

use by two wheel drive vehicles. 

A track constructed and/or maintained for fire management 

purposes, which is not generally of a standard adequate for allweather 

use by two wheel drive vehicles. 

Refers collectively to the Country Fire Authority, the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment and the 

Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board. 

The manner in which a fire reacts to the variables of fuel, weather 

and topography. Common measures of fire behaviour are rate of 

spread, flame height, fire spotting distance and intensity. 

Any natural or constructed discontinuity in a fuel bed that may be 

used to segregate, stop and control the spread of a fire, or to 

provide a fire control line from which to suppress a fire. 

A natural or constructed barrier, or treated fire edge, used in fire 

suppression and prescribed burning to limit/prevent the spread of 

fire. 

A relative number denoting an evaluation of rate of spread, or 

suppression difficulty for specific combinations of fuel, fuel moisture 

and wind speed. See also Forest Fire Danger Index. 

The period declared under Section 4 of the Country Fire Authority 

Act 1958 in respect to the Country Area of Victoria or any part 

thereof. Fire restrictions apply during this period. 

xxxii

RSCH.016.001.0239 

Fire District 

Fire Ecology 

Strategy 

Fire Management 

Plan (FMP) 

Fire Management 

Zone (FMZ) 

Fire Operations Plan 

(FOP) 

Fireplan 

Fire Protected Area 

DSE basic administrative unit for fire management. 

A strategy prepared by the relevant land manager to address the 

appropriate use or exclusion of fire at a landscape scale. Previously 

referred to as Ecological Fire Strategies. 

A plan prepared jointly by the DSE, other public land managers, the 

Country Fire Authority, local governments and the community as 

appropriate. It contains specific goals, objectives and standards for 

the use, application, exclusion and control of fire to meet land and 

resource management objectives in a defined area. Reference to 

Fire Management Plans may also mean Fire Protection Plans as 

prepared in accordance with the 1995 Code. 

A Fire Management Zone is an area of land upon which fire is 

managed for specific asset, fuel and ecological objectives. Four Fire 

Management Zones are established under the 2006 Code, these 

are: Asset Protection (Zone 1); Strategic Wildfire Moderation (Zone 

2); Ecological Management (Zone 3); and Prescribed Burning 

Exclusion (Zone 4). Previously referred to as Fuel Management 

Zones under the 1995 Code. 

An annual plan prepared to implement strategies contained in the 

Fire Management Plan. The Fire Operations Plan comprises a 

three year forward program comprising a schedule and maps for 

fuel reduction and ecological burning, and a schedule of planned 

prevention and preparedness works. 

Publicly available web based application which provides geographical 

information regarding planned burns within the Fire Operations 

Plan. 

The area defined in Section 3 of the Forests Act 1958, i.e. ‘any land 

(not being vested in or under the control of the Melbourne and 

Metropolitan Board of Works [now Melbourne Water]) which is: 

a) within any state forest; 

b) within any National Park; 

c) (unless excised…) within 1.5 km of: 

i) any reserved forest or area of unoccupied Crown land 

proclaimed as a protected forest; 

ii) any National Park; 

iii) any protected public land; 

d) within any protected public land. 

Fire Protection Plan 

A plan prepared by the DSE for the purpose of planning proper and 

sufficient works for the prevention and suppression of wildfire on 

public land. Fire Protection Plans have either been previously 

prepared in accordance with the 1995 Code, or outline a Fire 

Protection Strategy as described in the 2006 Code. 

xxxiii

RSCH.016.001.0240 


Fire Protection 

Strategy 

Fire Regime 

Fire Retardant 

Fire Suppression 

FireWeb 

Forest Fire 

Forest Fire Danger 

Index (FFDI) 

Fuelbreak 

Fuel Management 

Zone (FMZ) 

Fuel Reduction 

Burning 

Grassfire 

Ha 

Incident Control 

System (ICS) 

Integrated Fire 


Planning (IFMP) 

A strategy prepared by the DSE for the purpose of planning proper 

and sufficient works for the prevention and suppression of wildfire 

on public land. It will address fire protection and a regional level. 

Note that these are equivalent to a Fire Protection Plan 

previously prepared in accordance with the 1995 Code. 

The season, intensity, frequency and type of fires (peat or above 

ground) in a given location over a period of time, representing a 

number of successive fire events at that location. 

A substance that, by chemical or physical action, reduces the 

flammability of fuels or slows their rate of combustion. 

The activities connected with restricting the spread of wildfire, 

following its detection and making it safe. 

DSE on-line information management system. 

A fire burning mainly in forest and/or woodland. 

The index related to the chances of a fire starting, its rate of spread, 

intensity and difficulty of suppression according to various 

combinations of temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and 

both long and short term drought effects in a forest. (see also Fire 

Danger Index) 

A strip of land (not including areas subject to broad area prescribed 

burning) where vegetation has been reduced or removed. 

A Fuel Management Zone is an area of land upon which fire is 

managed for specific asset, fuel and ecological objectives. Five Fuel 

Management Zones were established under the 1995 Code, these 

are: Asset Protection (Zone 1); Strategic Fuel Reduced Corridors 

(Zone 2); Broad Area Fuel Reduced Mosaic (Zone 3); Specific Flora 

and Fauna Management (Zone 4); and Exclusion of Prescribed 

Burning (Zone 5). The 2006 Code renamed Fuel Management 

Zones Fire Management Zones and reduced the number of 

zones to four. See Fire Management Zones. 

The planned use of fire to reduce fuel levels in a specified area. 

(see also Prescribed Burning). 

An unplanned fire burning in predominantly grassy fuels. 

Hectare. Equal to 10,000 square metres. 

Incident Control System is a command structure set up under 

AIIMS to systematically and logically manage emergency incidents, 

including wildfires from small simple incidents to large difficult or 

multiple situations. It is designed to expand to ensure effective span 

of control at all levels. 

IFMP is the process undertaken collaboratively by organisations, 

agencies and community members to develop fire prevention, 

suppression and recovery strategies for all types of fire risk 

occurring within urban, rural and natural environments across 

xxxiv

RSCH.016.001.0241 

private and Crown land. 

Interface 

Metropolitan Fire 

and Emergency 

Services Board 

Model of Fire Cover 

Municipal Fire 

Prevention 

Committee (MFPC) 

Municipal Fire 

Prevention Officer 

(MFPO) 

National Park 

Networked 

Emergency 

Organisations (NEO) 

Parks Victoria (PV) 

Prescribed Burning 

Project Firefighters 

(PFFs) 

Protected Public 

Land 

Public Land 

Regeneration Burn 

Place where differing land uses converge. 

The agency responsible for the prevention and suppression of fire in 

the Melbourne Metropolitan area. 

Sets the resource requirements needed to meet the responsibilities 

of fire suppression on public land. 

Committee convened under section 54 of the Country Fire Authority 

Act 1958 for the purpose of coordination of fire planning within a 

municipality. 

Officer appointed under section 96A of the Country Fire Authority 

Act 1958 for the purposes of the Act, including issuing of directions 

to remove hazards or clear firebreaks. 

Land declared to be National Park under Schedule 2 of the National 

Parks Act 1975. 

The agencies in partnership with DSE that contribute to fire 

management on public land. Currently includes: Parks Victoria; 

Department of Primary Industries; VicForests and Melbourne 

Water. 

Under the Parks Victoria Act 1998, Parks Victoria’s responsibilities 

are to provide services to the State and its agencies for the 

management of parks, reserves and other land under the control of 

the State. For the purpose of the Forests Act 1958, Parks Victoria 

are considered part of DSE. 

The controlled application of fire under specified environmental 

conditions to a predetermined area and at the time, intensity and 

rate of spread required to attain planned resource management 

objectives. Includes Fuel Reduction Burning and Ecological 

Burning. 

Firefighters recruited by DSE on a full time basis for several months 

each fire season to undertake a range of duties including fire 

suppression and prescribed burning. 

A legal term. Any lands of the Crown including reserved Crown 

land, other than State forest or national park, declared to be 

protected public land under Section 62 of the Forests Act 1958. 

All State forest, national park and protected public land as 

defined by Section 3 of the Forests Act 1958, except that which is 

managed by Hancock’s Victorian Plantations (or its successor in 

law). 

A burn lit under prescribed conditions for the purpose of achieving 

regeneration of a particular species or vegetation type. 

xxxv

RSCH.016.001.0242 


Slip On Unit 

State Forest 

Water Points 

A tank, a live hose reel or tray, a small capacity pump, and an 

engine combined into a single one-piece assembly that can be 

slipped onto a truck bed or trailer and used for spraying water 

and/or foam on wildfires. 

As defined in Section 3 of the Forest Act 1958. State forest 

comprises publicly owned land which is managed for the 

conservation of flora and fauna; for the protection of water 

catchments and water quality; for the provision of timber and other 

forest products on a sustainable basis; for the protection of 

landscape, archeological and historical values; and to provide 

recreational and educational opportunities. 

Any natural or artificial source of water that can be used for 

firefighting operations. 

xxxvi

RSCH.016.001.0243 

Chapter 1: Introduction 

Chapter 

1 

Introduction 

Background to the Inquiry 

On 14 March 2007, the Environment and Natural Resources 

Committee received a reference under the Parliamentary Committees 

Act 2003 on public land management practices and their impact on 

Victorian bushfires. The terms of reference require: 

That the Environment and Natural Resources Committee inquire into and 

report upon the impact of public land management practices on the 

frequency, scale and intensity of bushfires in Victoria, and in particular — 

(1) the extent, timing, resourcing and effectiveness of prescribed burning 

on both crown and freehold land; 

(2) the manner in which prescribed burning is conducted, including how 

applicable codes of practice are employed; 

(3) the impact of prescribed burning and recent wildfires on Victoria’s 

biodiversity, wildlife and other natural assets including water quality and 

quantity; 

(4) the reporting process applicable to prescribed burning programs; 

(5) the legislative and regulatory arrangements for prescribed burns and 

bushfire management; 

(6) the effectiveness of maintaining permanent, strategically placed fire 

breaks and containment lines throughout public land areas; 

(7) the provision and maintenance of large water points on crown land to 

assist with bushfire aerial taskforce operations; 

(8) the impact of traditional land uses such as timber harvesting, grazing, 

four-wheel-driving, hunting, camping, mining and prospecting on the scale 

and intensity of bushfires and the ability of relevant agencies to respond; 

(9) the provision and maintenance of serviceable access tracks and 

signage to assist with recreational and emergency requirements; 

(10) the impact of climate change on bushfires and public land 

management practices; 

(11) whether additional measures are required to provide a mechanism for 

the skills, knowledge and interests of local communities, and appropriate 

scientific expertise, to be better represented in the management of bushfire 

risk on public land; 

(12) the involvement of local communities in the management of fire; 

1

RSCH.016.001.0244 


(13) any other matter that impacts on the scale and intensity of bushfires in 

Victoria. 

On 18 July 2007, the Legislative Council amended the terms of 

reference under section 33 of the Parliamentary Committees Act 2003 

to include: 

(14) the consequent impact of bushfires on the June/July 2007 Gippsland 

flood. 

The Committee is required to report to Parliament by 30 June 2008. 

This reference was given to the Committee in response to a number 

of exceptionally large and intense bushfires in Victoria in recent years, 

most notably the 2002/03 Victorian Alpine Fires and the 2006/07 

Great Divide Fires. 1 

Inquiry Process 

The Committee advertised the terms of reference and called for 

written submissions in Victorian newspapers in April 2007. The 

Committee received 257 written submissions and 719 proforma 

submissions (see Appendices One and Two). 

The Committee held 17 public hearings (see Appendix Three) 

throughout Victoria, undertook 18 site visits and briefings (see 

Appendix Five) and took evidence from 202 people representing 139 

organisations during the course of the Inquiry including state 

government departments, non-government organisations, peak 

industry groups, industry experts, businesses and individuals. 

Committee members and staff also attended conferences in Sydney, 

Melbourne and Hobart (see Appendix Four). 

Many individuals and organisations contributed to this Inquiry by 

making written submissions, participating in public hearings and 

conducting various site visits. The Committee is grateful to these 

people for generously sharing their experiences, ideas and expertise. 

1 Victorian Legislative Council, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), Book 4, 14 March 2007, p. 

573. 

2

RSCH.016.001.0245 


Bushfire in Australia 

Fire is a fundamental part of Australia’s natural environment, history 

and culture. 2 Many Australian ecological systems are dependent upon 

some form of “fire regime” to maintain ecosystem health and 

biodiversity while organisations such as the Country Fire Authority 

have become an integral part of rural culture. ◊ 

While Australia has a long history of natural and anthropogenic fire in 

the environment, there is a level of uncertainty regarding fire regimes 

which prevailed before the arrival of Europeans. This issue remains a 

topic of debate among pre-historians, scientists and anthropologists. 

In short, many aspects of Australia’s fire history, and fire regimes in 

particular, remain unclear. 

Evolution of the Australian Biota through Fire 

The Australian continent has been in a state of continual change 

since its separation from Antarctica approximately 50-65 million years 

ago. 3 The subsequent northward drift of the continent resulted in the 

evolution of a unique and isolated biota. 4 

As Australia moved north it experienced a change in climate which 

resulted in the development of a more arid and variable environment. 5 

As described by Cary (et al) in Australia Burning: 

The northward migration largely offset the cooling involved in the formation 

of the Antarctic icesheet. However, a consequence of the formation of the 

Antarctic icesheet was the intensification and northward displacement of the 

subtropical high-pressure system, triggering the aridification of the continent 

from the south to the north since the mid Tertiary. 6 

2 R. Whelan, K. Kanowski, M. Gill and A. Anderson, Living in a Land of Fire, Australian State 

of the Environment Committee, Department of Environment and Heritage, Canberra, 2006, p. 

1. 

◊ Plants and animals are adapted to sequences of fire rather than one single event; these 

sequences are called ‘fire regimes’. 

3 Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 'Marine geology and 

sedimentology of the Australian continental shelf', viewed 16 April 2008, 

; CSIRO 

Marine Research, 'Australia's Ocean Facts - the coast', viewed 23 April 2008, 

; Wet Tropics Management 

Authority, 'Evolution - From the Beginning', viewed 23 April 2008, 

; Parks and Wildlife Service Tasmania, 

'Gondwana - The Southern Supercontinent', viewed 23 April 2008, 

. 

4 Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, 'Australia's Biodiversity: An 

Overview of Selected Significant Components', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 

5 G. Cary, D. Lindenmayer and S. Dovers, Australia Burning: Fire Ecology, Policy and 

Management Issues, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 2003, p. 6. 



3

RSCH.016.001.0246 


Fire is thought to have first become an important part of the 

Australian environment during the Oligocene period, approximately 

30 million years ago. 7 During this period lightning was the main 

ignition source with resulting fires creating a “mosaic of large areas of 

vegetation in different stages of recovery”. 8 

The drying of the continent, combined with the onset of a more arid 

and variable climate, meant that the Nothofagus rainforest, which 

previously inhabited the majority of the continent, gradually 

disappeared from most areas of the mainland and was replaced by 

open forests, woodlands, shrub lands, heaths and grassland. 9 By their 

very nature, these open forests and woodlands were prone to 

burning. 10 

The impact of fire on Australia’s native flora is complex, with species 

responding in varying ways to different fire regimes. These 

differences may be due to individual species’ characteristics, fire 

response characteristics, and/or a result of the particular 

environmental conditions preceding and following fire. 11 For example, 

certain plants need heat and/or smoke to release their seeds, but fire 

episodes which are too frequent, or infrequent, may lead to the 

intrusion of other species that are better adapted to frequent or 

infrequent fire regimes. This is demonstrated by Eucalypts, which now 

dominate in Australia, but were probably originally restricted to the 

outskirts of rainforests. 12 Eucalypts are well adapted to a dry climate 

and drought as they have extensive root systems that find water 

efficiently and thick bark which aids in protecting the living structure of 

the tree from fire. 13 Some Eucalypt species only release seed after 

fire. 14 

7 Dr. K. Tolhurst, 'Bushfire in a Heating World: Learning from the Ecological Evidence', Paper 

presented at the 6th Bushfire Conference, Nature Conservation Council of NSW, Centenary 

Lecture Theatre, St Leonards, North Sydney, NSW, 2007, p. 1. 



9 Dr. K. Tolhurst, 'Bushfire in a Heating World: Learning from the Ecological Evidence', Paper 

presented at the 6th Bushfire Conference, Nature Conservation Council of NSW, Centenary 

Lecture Theatre, St Leonards, North Sydney, NSW, 2007, p. 1. 

10 P. Collins, Burn: The Epic Story of Bushfire in Australia, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 2006, p. 

330; Dr. K. Tolhurst, 'Bushfire in a Heating World: Learning from the Ecological Evidence', 

Paper presented at the 6th Bushfire Conference, Nature Conservation Council of NSW, 

Centenary Lecture Theatre, St Leonards, North Sydney, NSW, 2007, p. 1; T. Griffiths, 

Forests of Ash: An Environmental History, Cambridge University Press, Melbourne, 2001, p. 

6. 



4. 


330. 


330. 


331. 

4

RSCH.016.001.0247 


Repeated frequent burning may also significantly alter species 

diversity and the structure of certain plant communities. 15 This may 

have follow on effects for species such as birds which nest in the 

understorey. The ability of certain species to gain footholds in new 

ecosystems may also have a significant effect on the accumulation of 

fuel loads. For example, the introduction of a highly productive grass 

to an ecosystem may result in a higher fuel load. 

The impact of fire upon fauna also varies according to the individual 

species, its fire characteristics and the environmental conditions 

preceding and following the fire. Most species will experience a 

significant decline in population immediately after a bushfire event. 

Some animals may die through immediate fire effects such as smoke 

inhalation or burn related injuries, while others may die shortly 

afterwards from predation due to loss of habitat or a decline in food 

availability. 16 

According to WWF, Australia has the “worst rate of animal extinction 

in the world” and “almost 40 per cent of mammal extinctions globally, 

in the last 200 years have occurred in Australia”. WWF claims that this 

has been caused by a combination of “habitat destruction and 

alteration, invasive species and altered fire regimes”. 17 However, the 

Committee notes that Australian native flora and fauna has been 

constantly changing to adapt to Australia‘s changing climate and fire 

regimes. Indeed, as the Committee discusses in Chapter Two, the 

deliberate application of fire through an increase in prescribed burning 

has been identified as a major tool in the future preservation of flora 

and fauna. 

15 Dr. K. Tolhurst, 'Effects of Fuel Reduction Burning on Flora in a Dry Sclerophyll Forest', 

viewed 14 May 2007, 

. 

16 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'The effects of fire on Victorian bushland 

environments', 2004, viewed 20 April 2007, 

. 

17 World Wildlife Fund, Australian Species and Climate Change, WWF-Australia, Sydney, 

2008, p. 4. 

5

RSCH.016.001.0248 


Aboriginal Use of Fire 

Landscape fire is fundamental to a traditional Indigenous society as it has 

played a key role in natural resource management, as well as serving a 

variety of cultural and spiritual needs. 18 

Direct evidence from central and northern Australia, and historical 

accounts from early European explorers and settlers, indicate that 

Aborigines applied fire to the landscape. 19 Stephen Pyne contends 

that prior to the arrival of humans on the continent, Australia’s biota 

relied on lightning’s ‘lottery’ to experience fire, however, this changed 

with the arrival of Aborigines who made fire a constant on the 

landscape. 20 Eric Rolls extends this argument, claiming that it is 

“impossible to exaggerate the amount of burning in Aboriginal 

Australia”. 21 

Considerable debate still surrounds the exact use of fire by Aboriginal 

Australians. Until the early twentieth century some commentators 

suggested that Aboriginal people lacked the knowledge and capability 

to manage the landscape through the use of fire. 22 By the late 1960s, 

the view that Aborigines were simply “primitive hunter gatherers who 

wandered across their tribal lands eking out a basic existence, lacking 

technical expertise to manipulate or impact upon their environment” 

came under question with the emerging argument that the Aboriginal 

people used fire prudently as a land management tool, dubbed 

‘firestick farming’ by pre-historian Rhys Jones. 23 

Today it is generally accepted that Aboriginal burning of the landscape 

was not only used by Aboriginal people as a cultural and religious 

symbol, but also to consciously and deliberately manipulate the 

function of ecosystems for their own purposes. 24 However, the extent 

to which Aboriginal people used fire remains contentious. 



15. 

19 B. Esplin, M. Gill and N. Enright, Report of the Inquiry into the 2002-03 Victorian Bushfires, 

Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne, 2003, p. 117. 

20 S. Pyne, The Still-Burning Bush, Scribe Short Books, Melbourne, 2006, p. 16. 

21 Rolls cited in: P. Collins, Burn: The Epic Story of Bushfire in Australia, Allen & Unwin, 

Sydney, 2006, p. 332. 

22 Elkin (1938) cited in: D. Bird Rose, Nourishing Terrains: Australian Aboriginal Views of 

Landscape and Wilderness, Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra, 1996, p. 64. 


331. 

24 D. Bird Rose, Nourishing Terrains: Australian Aboriginal Views of Landscape and 

Wilderness, Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra, 1996, pp. 64-65; Prof. M. Langton, 

'"The fire at the centre of each family": Aboriginal traditional fire regimes and the challenges 

for reproducing ancient fire management in the protected areas of northern Australia', Paper 

presented at the FIRE! The Australian Experience, Australian Academy of Technological 

Sciences and Engineering Limited, University of Adelaide, 1999, p. 3; P. Zylstra, Fire History 

of the Australian Alps: Prehistory to 2003, Australaian Alps Liaison Committee, 2006, p. 28. 

6

RSCH.016.001.0249 


Historical and Scientific Evidence of pre-European Fire 

Evidence and analysis of Aboriginal burning practices, and the nature 

of the pre-European vegetation in the south east of Australia, is 

predominantly based on written accounts from early European settlers 

and explorers. There are countless references to fire in these 

accounts, some of which have been listed below: 

• Mr David Evans, referred to Hovell and Hume who in 1824 

observed that while moving through north east Victoria that “the 

land is all on fire around us” and that “we can’t see the hills for 

the smoke from the Aborigines’ fires”. Mr Evans stated “clearly 

the Aborigines’ firestick farming was taking place at that 

time”; 25 and 

• E.M. Curr, a Victorian grazier in the mid 1800s who noted that 

Aborigines were constantly setting fire to the grass and trees, 

both accidentally and systematically for hunting purposes. 26 

Many of the early settler’s and explorer’s accounts also note the 

nature of the vegetation which existed at early settlement. There is a 

view that at first settlement the Australian bush was largely composed 

of open woodland with no large sections of forest due to the frequent 

burning practices of the Aborigines, and that a lack of fire after 

European settlement resulted in the proliferation of thick regrowth. 27 

For example, Mr Lhotsky, a nineteenth century explorer notes that: 

Australian bushes are (so far as I am acquainted with them) all nearly 

destitute of shade, the trees of which they are universally composed (I mean 

the Eucalyptus), growing in the first place only solitary, never in combined 

tufts. 28 

Despite the countless references to the burning practices of 

Aborigines and the nature of the pre-European vegetation in early 

European explorers and settlers written accounts, there are a number 

of problems with relying on historical accounts. For example, Benson 

and Redpath argue that there is little consistency or scientific 

measurement in historical observations, and that observations do not 

25 D. Evans, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 November 2007; William Hovell, 

Supplementary evidence, Hovell's Journal - Lake George to Port Phillip, Document Tabled by 

Mr Rob Evans, 26 November 2008, p. 343. 

26 P. Zylstra, Fire History of the Australian Alps: Prehistory to 2003, Australaian Alps Liaison 

Committee, 2006, p. 11. 

27 J. S. Benson and P. A. Redpath, 'The Nature of Pre-European Vegetation in South-eastern 

Australia: a Critique of Ryan, Ryan and Starr (1995): The Australian Landscape - 

Observations of Explorers and Early Settlers', Cunninghamia 5, 1997, p. 285. 

28 Lhotsky (1834) cited in: P. Zylstra, Fire History of the Australian Alps: Prehistory to 2003, 

Australaian Alps Liaison Committee, 2006, p. 22. 

7

RSCH.016.001.0250 


provide clear evidence of the prevailing fire regime components such 

as season, regularity, size or intensity of the fires. 29 

Other authors have noted that the fire witnessed and documented by 

the European settlers was possibly used as a defence mechanism by 

the Aboriginal people against European intrusion, or that the way in 

which fire has been described by early settlers could be a reflection of 

the way in which the early settlers themselves viewed fire. 30 

…European culture tends to emphasise the dangers of burning and the 

destructiveness of fire to its material possessions. It is from this cultural 

background that the early navigators and explorers mentioned the presence 

of great ‘smokes’ and numerous fires so frequently in their reports. 

Apparently they assumed that the number and volume of the smokes seen 

was a measure of the amount of destruction being caused ….. 31 

Benson and Redpath also cast doubt on the extent of the open 

woodland described previously, noting that some explorers and early 

settlers were employed to seek out suitable grazing lands, which may 

account for the numerous references to “grassy woodlands”. 32 They 

also argue that they found “frequent references in the explorers’ 

journals to vegetation containing a dense understorey including 

coastal heath, shrub lands, rainforest and dense eucalypt forests”. 33 

In addition to historical accounts several scientific approaches have 

been utilised to determine historical fire regimes. These include, 

dendrochronology, the study of tree rings to “identify events in the 

history of a tree that can then be given a specific date” 34 ; and the 

collection of charcoal/pollen deposits from lake sediment. 35 

During the Committee’s visit to Western Australia, the Western 

Australian Department of Environment and Conservation 

demonstrated a form of dendrochronology which is currently used in 

determining past fire regimes in that state. The technique is based on 






Observations of Explorers and Early Settlers', Cunninghamia 5, 1997, p. 291; NSW Rural 

Fire Service, 'Fire. The Australian Experience', viewed 4 April 2008, 

. 

31 Nicholson (1978) quoted in: P. Zylstra, Fire History of the Australian Alps: Prehistory to 

2003, Australaian Alps Liaison Committee, 2006, p. 12. 











8

RSCH.016.001.0251 


visible colour banding of leaf bases on the stems of grasstrees 

(Xanthorrhoea) in south western Australia. This technique was also 

reported in the Esplin Report which noted the results of a 2001 

Western Australian xanthorrhoea dendrochronolgy study. The study 

suggested fire intervals during Aboriginal occupation of three to five 

years but of 10 to 15 years from the 1940s onwards. 36 

While Esplin reported that grasstree findings were a direct source of 

evidence that was lacking in the Aboriginal fire debate, a report by 

Miller (et al) argued that while it is clear that grasstree records do 

reflect fire history, they contain “as many false as true fire records and 

may tend towards over-reporting the incidence of fire.” 37 Moreover, 

Miller identified a range of problems with the determination of historic 

fire regimes though dendrochronology and other scientific techniques: 

Extent and Use of Fire 

Current methods for determining historic fire regimes in southern Australia – 

historical accounts of explorers and settlers, palynology, dendrochronology, 

forestry records and satellite and air photo imagery, suffer from limited 

coverage, restricted spatial or temporal resolution, incomplete records, 

suspect objectivity or other problems. 38 

The use of fire in the landscape by Aborigines prior to European 

settlement is increasingly acknowledged by a range of scientists and 

commentators. For example, Tim Flannery states that: 

… if we look back on the fossil record, it’s not an exaggeration to say that 

Aboriginal fire and hunting literally made the Australian environment that 

Europeans first encountered. 39 

Other commentators suggest that while the pre-European use of fire 

may have been extensive, its use was unlikely to have been uniform 

across the continent. Instead it has been suggested that fire was used 

for different reasons, at different times and across various landscapes. 

Professor Lindenmayer illustrates this concept below: 

…because Indigenous Australians encompassed in excess of 350 distinct 

languages groups who inhabited a very diverse range of landscapes it seem 

highly unlikely that a uniform Aboriginal fire regime would have applied 

continent-wide. 40 



37 B. Miller, T. Walshe, N. Enright and B. Lamont, 'Error in the inference of fire history from 

grasstrees', Austral Ecology, vol. 32, 2007, p. 908. 

38 B. Miller, T. Walshe, N. Enright and B. Lamont, 'Error in the inference of fire history from 

grasstrees', Austral Ecology, vol. 32, 2007, p. 908. 

39 T. Flannery, 'Beautiful Lies: Population and Environment in Australia', Quarterly Essay, no. 

9, Black Inc., 2003, p. 41. 

40 Lindenmayer (2003) quoted in: B. Schultz, The Misuse of Fire in the Natural Environment: 

Scientific Evidence Of the Adverse Impacts of Frequent Burning and Spring Burning, 

Conservation Council of Western Australia, 2007, p. 32. 

9

RSCH.016.001.0252 


The Esplin report found that a lack of uniformity in fire use by 

Aboriginal societies was due to: variations in vegetation types; 

different cultural reasons; and the fact that some areas were not 

regularly occupied by people and therefore were not required to be 

managed or stimulated by fire. 41 

For example, the Anangu people of central Australia, used patched 

burning to protect threatened Nganamara or “Mallee Fowl” 

populations. Fire was applied to spinifex areas to protect fire sensitive 

Mulga thickets so that these could provide necessary habitat for the 

birds. 42 

Conversely, some areas are thought to have been “deliberately and 

forcibly” protected from fire. 43 Griffiths states that: 

Aborigines probably did burn the margins of the wet sclerophyll forests and 

may have maintained clearings and pathways in forest areas (particularly 

along ridge tops), but it seems unlikely that they systematically burnt the 

mountain forests in the way they did the drier forests and plains. 44 

This view is supported by Collins who states that the “Alpine areas of 

New South Wales and Victoria were largely left alone except for moth 

gathering and spiritual reasons” and that “there was no broad scale or 

frequent burning in the Alpine areas prior to white settlement”. 45 

The integration of Indigenous fire management systems and western 

science appear to have been beneficial and successful in the Northern 

Territory. However, in the south east of Australia the knowledge of 

Aboriginal fire regimes is less well known and there are fewer 

accounts of such practices. 

European Arrival and Use of Fire 

The arrival of European settlers saw the implementation of a fire 

regime in stark contrast to that used by Aboriginal Australians. 46 

Aboriginal fire management probably disappeared from the mountains in the 

first couple of decades after contact as the numbers of Aboriginal people 







44 T. Griffiths, Forests of Ash: An Environmental History, Cambridge University Press, 

Melbourne, 2001, p. 26. 

45 P. Collins, Burn: The Epic Story of Bushfire in Australia, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 2006, pp. 

334-337. 



1. 

10

RSCH.016.001.0253 


dropped very quickly and their introduction of any fire was likely seen as 

interference with the grazing industry. 47 

Having had minimal exposure to bushfires, European settlers tended 

to be wary of bushfires which were suppressed to protect life and 

property while deliberate fire was used to clear native vegetation for 

agricultural purposes. 48 European settlers are thought to have 

dramatically altered the frequencies, intensities and seasons of 

burning although the Committee notes the evidence that some settlers 

may have preserved pre-existing fire regimes. 

Contemporary Australian knowledge of bushfire suppression and 

management has evolved significantly since the arrival of the first 

European settlers. Land managers now use fire as a tool in primary 

production, in biodiversity conservation, and in the protection of life and 

assets. 49 In particular, the use of fire by forest managers has evolved 

from a focus on suppression alone, to the use of fire as a management 

tool. Foresters found that protecting forests by excluding fire 

encouraged the accumulation of fuel. 50 Accordingly they developed a 

low intensity fire regime to reduce fuel loads now known as prescribed 

burning. 51 

Stakeholder Evidence 

As noted by Collins, various commentators advocate a return to the 

pre-European Aboriginal use of fire in the landscape to mitigate the 

risk of bushfires as experienced in south east Australia in recent 

years. 52 What has happened is that a coalition has formed including cotton-and graingrowers, 

beef producers, loggers and big agribusiness, many of whom 

favour regular burning and large scale land clearance so so-called 

‘regrowth’. This coalition has used the fire-stick farming hypothesis to 

promote extensive burning as a hazard reduction tool…Their argument is 

that if we can recover the Aboriginal way of ‘managing the landscape’ we will 

find a convergence of modern theories of land-clearing and regular burning 

with pre-European Aboriginal fire regimes. 53 





1. 



1. 

50 B. McCormick, Bushfires: Is Fuel Reduction Burning the Answer, Department of the 

Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2002, p. 3. 

51 B. McCormick, Bushfires: Is Fuel Reduction Burning the Answer, Department of the 

Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2002, p. 3. 


335. 


335. 

11

RSCH.016.001.0254 


This view was not shared by the majority of stakeholders who 

provided evidence to the Inquiry. A number of stakeholders supported 

the view that Aboriginals played a significant role in pre-European fire 

regimes. For example, Heather Livingstone states in the 

Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation 

submission: 

In earliest times the indigenous people used the firestick as a management 

tool – burning the dry grass, keeping the grassy areas fresh and green and 

ensuring a plentiful supply of wildlife. These fires were not dangerous – just 

slow burning and maintaining a balance in the bush. After the limitations on 

these people, the settlers followed their ways and the country retained its 

grassland quality. Forestry Officers took over this responsibility of 

maintaining a balanced public land service. These men had a good 

understanding of the bush and did a very good management job. Then the 

regulations began to be more and more restrictive. Public land management 

and the responsibility of the Minister, have been evaded, over a long time. 54 

Mr Simon Turner supported Ms Livingstone’s evidence stating: 

The timing and the effectiveness of prescribed burning goes hand-in-hand. 

Where you have had perhaps firestick farming in the past with indigenous 

communities practising their traditional roles, those attitudes were taken up 

by the early Europeans and followed through. It did not take them long to 

realise that the country changed if they did not continue to keep firing the 

landscape. But with Europeans you obviously had assets coming along. 

Assets needed protecting, therefore we started to reduce the amount of fire 

in the environment. 55 

Some commentators argue that Aboriginal communities should work 

with current land management authorities in an effort to combine the 

two knowledge systems and not only create an inclusive land 

management system, but in an effort to help in the understanding of 

the way in which both Aboriginal people and Europeans connect with 

the landscape. 56 Deborah Bird Rose suggests that the “congruence of 

the two knowledge systems in the field of fire, offers models for how 

ecological knowledge more generally can be managed on this 

continent, and for how Aboriginals and settler Australians can share in 

the work of life”. 57 

54 Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, Submission, no. 24, 2 May 

2007, p. 5. 

55 S. Turner, Mountain Cattleman's Association of Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 

November 2007. 

56 S. Ellis, P. Kanowski and R. Whelan, National Inquiry on Bushfire Mitigation and 

Management, Canberra, 2004, p. 129; B. Gott, 'Fire as an Aboriginal Management Tool in 

South-Eastern Australia', Paper presented at the Australian Bushfire Conference, Albury, 

1999; D. Bird Rose, Nourishing Terrains: Australian Aboriginal Views of Landscape and 

Wilderness, Canberra, 1996, p. 63; R. Whelan, K. Kanowski, M. Gill and A. Anderson, Living 

in a land of fire, Australian State of the Environment Committee, Department of Environment 

and Heritage, Canberra, 2006, pp. 10,15. 

57 D. Bird Rose, Nourishing Terrains: Australian Aboriginal Views of Landscape and 

Wilderness, Australian Heritage Commission, Canberra, 1996, p. 63. 

12

RSCH.016.001.0255 


Conclusion 

This combination has occurred in parts of Australia and as Professor 

Langton indicates “our knowledge of Aboriginal landscape burning is 

greatest where Aboriginal affiliation with landscapes continue”. 58 For 

example, in the north of Australia, where Aboriginal people are major 

land owners, much of the traditional knowledge has been retained, 

and can be re-applied to landscape management. 59 

There are many obstacles associated with re-creating traditional 

Aboriginal burning programs in southern Australia particularly in 

locations such as Victoria where the breadth of traditional knowledge 

in relation to fire management is extremely limited. 

It must be acknowledged that there are fundamental differences 

between the aims of Aboriginal burning and those of modern land 

management practices. Contemporary landscapes are very different 

to pre settlement landscapes and land managers today face issues 

such as disease, weed and pest invasions, the protection of assets, 

public opinion, community engagement, resourcing, and occupational 

health and safety, all of which have impacted upon landscape and fire 

management. 60 

Collins argues that Aboriginal people did not “manage” the landscape, 

“their connectedness to the land and fauna was localised, spiritual and 

relational” and because of this there are problems with trying to recreate 

the past. 61 Collins argues that: 

What is lacking is an acknowledgement of the immense epistemological, 

cosmological and spiritual divide between Aboriginal culture and the 

technologically advanced, but spiritually and ethnologically blinkered 

eighteenth and nineteenth century settlers. 62 

Similarly, A Nation Charred the House of Representatives Report on 

Bushfires notes: 

The Committee is not in a position to make definitive conclusions based on 

suggested methods of Aboriginal burning practices, the debate does bear 

out that fire, and its absence, is a significant factor in all the varied ecological 

58 Prof. M. Langton, '"The fire at the centre of each family": Aboriginal traditional fire regimes 

and the challenges for reproducing ancient fire management in the protected areas of 

northern Australia', Paper presented at the FIRE! The Australian Experience, Australian 

Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering Limited, University of Adelaide, 1999, 

p. 4. 



15. 

60 B. Schultz, The Misuse of Fire in the Natural Environment: Scientific Evidence Of the 

Adverse Impacts of Frequent Burning and Spring Burning, Conservation Council of Western 

Australia, 2007, p. 5. 


337. 


336. 

13

RSCH.016.001.0256 


communities and that fire regimes (including the exclusion of fire from 

sensitive areas) is a land management consideration of primary 

importance. 63 

As concluded by Esplin, while it would be useful to have more 

traditional local knowledge in the south east of Australia for use in 

contemporary fire management (as in northern Australia), any use of a 

traditional Aboriginal burning regime in the south east of Australia 

“would be an experiment, and should be recognised as such”. 64 

Bushfire in Victoria 

Victoria has an area of approximately 22.7 million hectares 

(approximately three per cent of Australia’s land mass). 

Approximately one third of that area (7.7 million hectares) is national 

park, State forest or other conservation area. 65 Of this 7.7 million 

hectares, State forest comprises approximately 45 per cent (3.4 

million hectares) 66 with the remainder comprising national and other 

parks (55 per cent or 4.2 million hectares). 67 

Victoria's parks and forests contain a wide variety of ecological 

vegetation groupings which include mallee woodlands, rainforests, 

grassy woodlands and heath lands. 68 Figure 1.1 illustrates the variety 

of native vegetation groupings which exist in Victoria. Each of these 

vegetation groupings pose differing challenges for fire management. 

63 House of Representatives Select Committee into the recent Australian Bushfires, A Nation 

Charred: Report on the inquiry into Bushfires, The Parliament of the Commonwealth of 

Australia, Canberra, 2003, p. 50. 



65 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Victoria's Forests - Forest Fact Sheet', 

viewed 16 June 2008, . 

66 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Visiting State Forests', viewed 21 April 

2008, . 

67 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Visiting State Forests', viewed 21 April 

2008, . 

68 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Simplified Native Vegetation Groups', 

viewed 25 April 2008, . 

14

RSCH.016.001.0257 


Figure 1.1: Victoria’s native vegetation 

groupings. 69 

69 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Simplified Native Vegetation Map of 

Victoria - Extant', viewed 25 April 2008, 

15

RSCH.016.001.0258 


In addition to the challenges posed by differing ecosystem 

requirements, the interface area between private and public land, has 

become a key issue for fire managers. As noted by Esplin, many 

Victorian’s choose to live or holiday in an area based on its landscape 

amenity. 70 While this has always been the case, when coupled with 

Victoria’s increasing population density, the bushfire risk posed by 

people living in close proximity to the bush represents a significant 

challenge for land managers. 

Significant Victorian Bushfires 

The state has experienced over 35 significant fires since 1851, with 

approximately two-thirds of these fires having occurred since the 

1950s. A list of significant fires to have impacted on Victoria is at Table 

1.1. In terms of the quantum of area burnt, the 1939, 1983, 2002/03 

and 2006/07 bushfires were the most significant fires in Victoria since 

the Black Friday fires of 1851. 

Figures 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4 illustrate the areas burnt during the 1939, 

1983, and 2003 and 2006-07 bushfires. 

. 



16

RSCH.016.001.0259 


Black Thursday 

6 February 1851 

Table 1.1: Significant Victorian bushfires. 71 

Date Localities Impact 

Wimmera, Portland, Gippsland, 

Plenty Ranges, Westernport, 

Dandenong districts, Heidelberg 

Red Tuesday 


Early 1900’s (esp 1905, 1906, 

1912, 1914) 

1926 

1932 

Black Friday 

13 January 1939 (December 

1938–January 1939) 

3-4 March 1942 

22 December 1943 

14 January 1944 





21 February – 13 March 1965 



South Gippsland 

Gippsland, Grampians, Otway 

Ranges 

Noojee. Kinglake, Warburton, Erica, 

Dandenong Ranges 

Many districts across Victoria, 

particularly Gippsland 

Large areas of the North East and 

Gippsland, the Otway and Grampian 

ranges and the towns of Rubicon, 

Woods Point, Warrandyte, Noojee, 

Omeo, Mansfield, Dromana, Yarra 

Glen, Warburton, Erica 

Hamilton, South Gippsland – Yarram 

(burning on a 120 km front) 

Wangaratta 

Central and western districts, 

Morwell, Yallourn 

Benalla area 

The Basin, Christmas Hills, Kinglake, 

St Andrews, Hurstbridge, 

Warrandyte, Mitcham 

Longwood 

Gippsland 

Dandenong Ranges, The Basin, 

Upwey 

Lara, Daylesford, Bulgana, Yea, 

Darraweit, Kangaroo Flat, 

Approx. 12 people 

One million sheep 

Thousands of cattle 

Approx. five million 

hectares (a quarter of 

Victoria) 

12 people 

2,000 buildings 

260,000 hectares 

Varied (100,000 hectares in 

1914) 

60 people 

Many farms and houses 

9 people 

71 people 

More than 650 

homes/shops 

69 timber mills 

1.5–2 million hectares 

1 person 

100 sheep 

2 farms 

20 homes 

10 people 

Thousands of hectares of 

grass country 

49 people 

500 homes 

Huge stock losses 

More than one million 

hectares of grassland and 

160,000 hectares of forest. 

Plant works, open cut mine 

and buildings 

Several people 


8 people 

454 homes 

7 people (all from the one 

family) 

6 houses 

More than 60 homes/shops 

More than 4000 stock 

750,000 acres of forest 

40,000 acres of grassland 

64 homes 


22 people 

230 homes 

71 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Major Bushfires in Victoria', viewed 3 April 

2007, ; B. Esplin, M. Gill and N. Enright, Report of the Inquiry into 

the 2002-03 Victorian Bushfires, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne, 2003, pp. 

10-11; Ministerial Taskforce on Bushfire Recovery, 2006 Report from the Ministerial 

Taskforce on Bushfire Recovery, Victorian Government, Melbourne, 2006, p. 3. 

17

RSCH.016.001.0260 


Korongvale 

21schools/churches/halls 

More than 12,000 stock 


December 1972 Mt Buffalo 12,140 hectares 


Penshurst, Tatyoon, Streatham, 

Creswick, Pura Pura, Werneth, 

Cressy, Rokewood, Beeac, Mingay, 

Lismore, Little River 


Bairnsdale 

4 people 

108 houses/shops 


2 people 

1 house 

6,500 stock 

28 December 1980 – 6 January Sunset country and the big desert 119,000 hectares 

1981 

31 January 1983 Cann River 250,000 hectares 


Mount Macedon 

50 Houses 


Monivae, Branxholme, Cockatoo, 

East Trentham, Mt Macedon, Otway 

Ash Wednesday 

Ranges, Belgrave Heights, 


Warburton, Cudgee, Upper 

Beaconsfield, Framlingham 




December 31 1997 – 9 January 

1998 



March 2002 

December 2001-January 2002 

17–31 December 2002 

7 January – 8 March 2003 

January 2006 

Summer 2006/07 

Maryborough, Avoca, Little River 

Strathbogie 

Dandenong Ranges, Creswick, 

Heathcote, Teddywaddy, Gough’s 

Bay 

Caledonia River area of the Alpine 

National Park, Carey River State 

Forest 

Linton 

Dadswells Bridge 

Glenaroua 

Deployment of CFA to NSW and 

ACT fires 

Big Desert 

Over 80 fires started by lightning, 

North East Victoria, Gippsland 

Ararat, Baw Baw Shire, Glenelg 

Shire, Golden Plains Shire, Greater 

Geelong, Horsham, Latrobe, 

Moorabool Shire, Moyne Shire, 

Murrindindi Shire, Northern 

Grampians Shire, South Gippsland 

Shire, Southern Grampians Shire. 

Alpine Shire, Benalla, Indigo Shire, 

Mansfield Shire, Corangamite Shire, 

Golden Plains Shire, Baw Baw Shire, 

East Gippsland, Latrobe, Wellington 

Shire, Moyne Shire, Wangaratta 

47 people 

Over 2,000 homes/shops 



3 people 

182 homes 

400 farms 

46,000 stock 

1 person 

17 homes 


3 people 

41 houses 

1 CFA fire truck 


5 CFA fire fighters 

1 CFA tanker 

780 hectares 

1 house damaged 

14,500 hectares of crop 

and pasture 

8000 stock (mainly sheep) 

500km of fencing 

1 house 

6,100 hectares of grass 

and scrub 

80 trucks and 2794 CFA 

personnel for 14 days 

1 abandoned house 


1 person (indirectly) 

41 houses 

9,000 livestock 

1.1 million hectares 

4 people 

57 houses 

64,00 stock 


1 person 

51 houses 

1,741 stock 

Greater than 1.2 million 

hectares 

18

RSCH.016.001.0261 


Figure 1.2: Victorian bushfires 1939. 72 

72 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 14 May 2008. 

19

RSCH.016.001.0262 


Figure 1.3: Victorian bushfires 1983. 73 


20

RSCH.016.001.0263 


Figure 1.4: Victorian bushfires 2003, 2006 & 2007. 74 


21

RSCH.016.001.0264 


Causes of Fire on Public Land 

Approximately 600 bushfires, caused by both natural and human 

activities, occur on Victorian public land every year. 75 As can be seen 

in Figure 1.5, in the past 20 years, over 50 per cent of fires on 

Victorian public land are attributable to lightning strikes and arson (26 

per cent and 25 per cent respectively). 76 However, lightning strikes 

contribute 46 per cent of total area burnt (see Figure 1.6). 77 Public 

utilities and arson both provide a 14 per cent contribution to total area 

burnt. 78 The total area burnt as a result of prescribed burn escapes 

(five per cent) was less than the total area burnt as a result of 

agricultural burn off escapes (seven per cent). 79 

Figure 1.5: Causes of fire on Victorian public land by 

number of fires each year for the past 20 years. 80 

7% 

1% 

1% 

9% 

2% 

5% 

14% 

Prescribed burn escapes 

Public Utilities 

Unknown 

3% 

Lightning 

Deliberate 

14% 

Agricultural Escapes 

Campfires 

Cigarettes 

Miscellaneous 

Machinery 

44% 

75 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'What Causes Bushfires on Public Land in 

Victoria?' viewed 4 May 2007, . 

76 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Bushfire Statistics', viewed 4 May 2007, 

. 


. 


. 


. 


. 

22

RSCH.016.001.0265 


Figure 1.6: Causes of fire on Victorian public land by 

total area burnt for the past 20 years. 81 

7% 

1% 

1% 

9% 

2% 

5% 

14% 

Prescribed burn escapes 

Public Utilities 

Unknown 

3% 

Lightning 

Deliberate 

14% 

Agricultural Escapes 

Campfires 

Cigarettes 

Miscellaneous 

46% 

Machinery 

Recent Bushfire Inquiries 

In response to recent fires, numerous Parliaments and key 

government agencies have instigated inquiries into aspects of fire 

management. Some of the prominent reviews into fire management 

are listed in Table 1.2. 

Table 1.2: Fire inquiries/reports. 

Author/Jurisdiction Title Year 

Royal Commission (Victoria) Report of the Royal Commission to Inquire 1939 

into the Causes of and Measures Taken to 

Prevent the Bush Fires of January 1939, and 

to Protect Life and Property and the Measures 

to be Taken to Prevent Bush Fires in Victoria 

and to Protect Life and Property in the Event 

of Future Bush Fires ( The Stretton Report) 

New South Wales (Parliament) Report on Inquiry into the NSW Rural Fire 2000 

Service. 

Victoria (State Coroners Office) Report of the Investigation and Inquests into a 2002 

Wildfire and the Deaths of Five Firefighters at 

Linton on 2 December 1998. 

New South Wales (Parliament) Report on Inquiry into 2001/02 Bushfires. 2002 

Commonwealth (Parliament) A Nation Charred: Report on the inquiry into 2003 

bushfires. 

Victoria Report of the Inquiry into the 2002-2003 2003 


. 

23

RSCH.016.001.0266 


Victorian Bushfires (The Esplin report). 

Victoria (Auditor-General Fire prevention and preparedness. 2003 

Victoria) 

Australian Capital Territory (ACT Inquiry into the Operational Response to the 2003 

Government) 

January 2003 Bushfires in the ACT. 

Council of Australian 

National Inquiry on Bushfire Mitigation 2004 

Governments 

and Management. 

South Australia (Parliament) Eyre Peninsula Bushfire and Native 2005 

Vegetation. 

Victoria (Victorian Government) 2006 Report from the Ministerial Taskforce on 2006 

Bushfire Recovery. 

Victoria (Country Fire Authority) Debrief Outcomes: Significant Fires in Victoria 2006 

December 2005 and January 2006. 

Australian Capital Territory The Canberra Firestorm: Inquests and Inquiry 2006 

(Coroner’s Office) 

into Four Deaths and Four Fires between 8 

and 18 January 2003. 

Western Australia (Parliament) Inquiry into Fire and Emergency Services 2006 

Legislation. 

Victoria (Victorian Government) 2007 Report from the Ministerial Taskforce on 2007 

Bushfire Recovery 

South Australia Government Inquiry into Bushfire Management 2007 

Inquiry Report 

Chapter Two of this report considers the role of prescribed burning as 

a means to both mitigate the future impacts of bushfire and maintain 

ecosystem health. In doing so, the chapter provides an overview of 

the legislative and regulatory arrangements governing prescribed 

burning in Victoria. The chapter also provides an examination of the 

extent and effectiveness of prescribed burning in Victoria. 

Chapter Three provides an overview of the environmental impacts of 

Victoria’s recent bushfires. The first half of the chapter considers the 

biodiversity impacts of the 2003 and the 2006/07 bushfires, while the 

second half of the chapter examines the impact of the 2006/07 

bushfires on the June/July Gippsland flood. Both chapters consider 

the role of prescribed burning, particularly landscape scale prescribed 

burning, in mitigating the impacts of bushfire on biodiversity and 

severe flooding. 

Chapter Four considers the use of fire breaks and access tracks in 

suppression activities. The chapter also examines the provision of 

large water points and the use of aerial resources in fire suppression 

activities. 

Chapter Five provides an examination of the impact of traditional land 

uses on the scale and intensity of bushfires. The impacts of a number 

of commercial and recreational activities are considered in this 

chapter, including timber harvesting, four-wheel driving, grazing and 

apiary. 

24

RSCH.016.001.0267 


Chapter Six considers the importance of community engagement in 

developing appropriate land management practices for the prevention 

and suppression of bushfire. In doing so, the Committee examines the 

current standard of community engagement employed by the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner 

agencies. 

Chapter Seven provides an examination of climate change 

highlighting the potential ramifications for bushfire management. In 

doing so, the chapter provides a brief overview of the science and 

debate surrounding climate change, followed by an examination of 

scientific and stakeholder evidence in relation to climate change and 

bushfire. An analysis of the Government’s response to the potential 

impacts posed by climate in relation to bushfires is also provided. 

25

RSCH.016.001.0268 


26

RSCH.016.001.0269 

Chapter 2: Prescribed Burning In Victoria 

Chapter 

2 

Prescribed Burning in Victoria 

Introduction 

A significant part of the community and Government response to the 

Victorian bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 has been an increased focus on 

prescribed burning on public land. This was reflected in the evidence 

provided to the Committee, an overriding theme of which was the 

importance of prescribed burning as a means of mitigating the size and 

intensity of bushfires, and as a tool for achieving appropriate fire regimes for 

ecological communities. 

The importance attached to prescribed burning is also reflected in the fact 

that it is the subject of the Inquiry’s first five terms of reference and is also 

relevant to terms of reference eleven and twelve. 

Prescribed burning is an issue which has tended to polarise opinion 

between those in favour of increased “broadscale” burning, particularly for 

fuel reduction but also for ecological purposes, and those who argue that 

burning on such a scale does little to reduce the risks associated with large 

bushfires and can be damaging to the environment. This polarisation was 

also apparent in the views presented to the Committee during the course of 

the Inquiry, although the majority of stakeholders argued for an increase in 

the level of prescribed burning for fuel reduction and forest ecology. The 

Esplin Report referred to a divergence of values within the community as 

one basis for this polarisation: 

In any society there is a range of held values that determine what constitutes an 

asset and for whom. Any evaluation of a fuel-reduction program using prescribed 

burning (or any other technique) will often depend on the assessors own values. 82 

However, as the Esplin Report also noted, “held values” are merely one of a 

number of factors that have influenced the prescribed burning debate. 83 

Other factors include: the various practical constraints on the conduct of 

prescribed burning; incomplete scientific knowledge; incomplete records; 

and a lack of certainty regarding the most appropriate way to evaluate the 

prescribed burning program. 84 In the Committee’s view, there is significant 







27

RSCH.016.001.0270 


potential for ongoing progress in each of these areas to reduce the relative 

influence of diverging values on the prescribed burning debate. 

Overview of prescribed burning 

Prescribed burning is the practice of lighting fires, under specified 

conditions, to achieve particular land management objectives, which include: 

• fuel reduction to assist in the control of bushfires – also known as “fuel 

reduction burning”; 

• the conservation and management of flora and fauna – also known as 

“ecological burning”; and 

• the re-regeneration of forest following commercial harvesting operations – 

also known as “regeneration burning”. 85 

A more detailed definition, which reflects the influence of the range of 

interrelated factors that affect the planning and conduct of prescribed 

burning is: 

Prescribed burning is the “controlled application of fire to natural or modified fuels 

under specified environmental conditions that allow the fire to be confined to a 

predetermined area and at the same time to produce the intensity of heat and rate of 

spread required to attain planned resource management objectives” (Cheney 1993). 

Controlling fires in prescribed burns is [achieved]…by carefully exploiting the fire 

environment. The skilful combination of lighting pattern, timing, use of topography, 

weather and fuel conditions is the key to successful prescribed burning. 86 

“Prescribed burning” is clearly a broad term. Moreover, it is sometimes used 

to refer to any one, or all three, of the land management objectives noted 

above. “Prescribed burning” is also often used interchangeably with a variety 

of other terms such as “controlled burning” and “planned fire”. 

It should also be noted that an individual prescribed burn may have multiple 

land management objectives. For example, a goal of the Department of 

Sustainability and Environment (DSE) in recent years has been the 

increased use of burns with the goal of achieving fuel reduction and 

ecological goals simultaneously. The integration of these objectives is a 

major area of research and development within DSE’s prescribed burning 

program, which is discussed below. 

28 

85 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Prescribed burning activities', viewed 5 December 

2007, ; See also Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 

2007, p. 1.; B. Esplin, M. Gill and N. Enright, Report of the Inquiry into the 2002-03 Victorian 

Bushfires, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne, 2003, p. 74 and 330; Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, Ecological effects of repeated low-intensity fire in a mixed eucalypt 

foothill forest in south-eastern Australia - summary report (1894 - 1999), Department of Sustainability 

and Environment, Victoria, 2003, p. iii; Department of Sustainability and Environment, Code of 

Practice for Fire Management on Public Land, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Melbourne, 2006, p. 17; Emergency Services Commissioner, Examination of Prescribed Burning 

Practices, Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Melbourne, 2005, p. 17. 

86 Dr. K. Tolhurst and N. P. Cheney, Synopsis of the Knowledge Used in Prescribed Burning in 

Victoria, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, p. 79.

RSCH.016.001.0271 


The types of prescribed burning which are the primary focus of this chapter 

are fuel reduction burns and ecological burns as these were the issues on 

which the Committee received the bulk of its evidence. While the Committee 

recognises that traditional definitions of prescribed burning include 

regeneration burning, for the purposes of this report prescribed burning will 

refer only to fuel reduction burns and ecological burns. However, since the 

practice of regeneration burning has historically caused the diversion of 

some resources from the fuel reduction and ecological burning programs, 

regeneration burning will be discussed separately towards the end of this 

chapter. 87 

The history of fuel reduction burning 

Fuel reduction burning, is generally considered to have begun as a 

silvicultural practice during the early the 20 th century. However, as the 

Committee has noted in Chapter One, the deliberate use of fire to alter the 

landscape is now widely acknowledged as a practice of Indigenous 

Australians prior to European occupation. Deliberate fire has also been used 

extensively in Australia since the arrival of Europeans to clear areas of 

forest and woodland for agriculture. 88 

Fuel reduction burning in Australia was developed by forest managers in the 

jarrah forests of southwest Western Australia during the 1920s as a means 

of protecting the commercial value of forests from bushfires. 89 Prior to the 

1950s in Victoria, fuel reduction burning was undertaken in an informal 

manner by a range of stakeholders including the Government, graziers, 

foresters, bushman and adjacent private landholders. From the 1950s, the 

approach towards fuel reduction burning was formalised as the primary 

Government strategy for reducing the risk of uncontrolled fires. 

Prescribed burning on public land 

Prescribed burning in Victoria is predominantly conducted on public land. 

Public land comprises about one third of Victoria’s total land area – about 

7.7 million hectares out of a total of 22.7 million hectares. 90 Approximately 

92 per cent of public land is forested, comprising approximately 3.4 million 



88 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'History of Fire Management on Public Land', 

viewed 28 March 2008, . 

89 B. McCormick, Bushfires: Is Fuel Reduction Burning the Answer, Department of the Parliamentary 

Library, Canberra, 2002, p. 3.; P. Collins, Burn: The Epic Story of Bushfire in Australia, Allen & Unwin, 

Sydney, 2006, p. 93. 

90 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, p. 2.; Auditor General Victoria, Fire 

Prevention and Preparedness, Auditor General Victoria, Melbourne, 2003, p. 24; Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, Fire and Victoria's Parks and Forests, Department of Sustainability 

and Environment, Melbourne, 2004, p. 1; Geoscience Australia, 'Area of Australia, States and 

Territories', viewed 25 February 2008, 

. 

29

RSCH.016.001.0272 


hectares of State forest and 3.7 million hectares of national parks and other 

reserves. 91 

The extent of forest on private land is significantly less than on public land. 

Privately owned forest accounts for around 1.2 million hectares of largely 

native forest and 360,000 hectares of plantation. 92 Victoria’s State of the 

Forests Report defines “forest” as: 

An area, incorporating all living and non-living components, that is dominated by 

trees with an existing or potential stand height exceeding 5 metres, and with existing 

or potential projective foliage cover of overstorey strata at least 30 per cent. 93 

However, the Esplin Report noted a study by Tolhurst, which found that 

there are two “broad forest types” which would generally be excluded from 

prescribed burning programs: “wetter forests” such as the south eastern 

slopes in steeper country; and some native conifer forests where surface 

fuels do not reach the levels that would trigger fuel reduction burning. 94 

Tolhurst estimated that the exclusion of these areas would remove around 

21 per cent of public land from any prescribed burning program, leaving the 

area of public land available for prescribed burning at around 6.2 million 

hectares. 95 Figure 2.1 shows the relative extent of: State forest (shaded 

green); national park and other reserves (shaded pink); and freehold land 

(shaded yellow). 

30 

91 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victoria's State of the Forests Report, Department 

of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 7. 








Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne, 2003, p. 95.

RSCH.016.001.0273 


Figure 2.1: State Forest, National Parks and Other Reserves 

in Victoria. 96 

Significant areas of non-forested public land include: areas above the tree 

line in north east Victoria; heathlands, mallee shrublands; hummock 

grasslands and wetland areas. 

Prescribed burns are generally conducted in Autumn or Spring when the air 

temperature is lower and fire behaviour is more predictable. 97 DSE informed 

the Committee that more than 75 per cent of Victoria’s prescribed burning is 

conducted during Autumn, while the Spring burning program is largely 

restricted to asset protection. 98 

The Department of Sustainability and Environment is responsible for the 

management of all prescribed burning on public land. Burns are also 

conducted with the assistance of other agencies, including Parks Victoria, 

VicForests, and CFA. 

Burning on private land 

There is no coordinated program of prescribed burning on private land. 

Private landholders are largely responsible for bushfire prevention and 

mitigation works on their own land and may engage in “burning off” as one 

such measure. Landholders may light fires in the open at particular times of 

the year to burn off grass, stubble, weeds, undergrowth or other 

96 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Forest Maps and Facts', viewed 26 February 2008, 

. 

97 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Prescribed burning activities', viewed 5 December 

2007, . 

98 D. Tainsh, Fire Manager, Gippsland, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of 

evidence, Omeo, 29 November 2007. 

31

RSCH.016.001.0274 


vegetation. 99 Burning off is prohibited during a total fire ban and can only be 

conducted under a written permit issued by the Municipal Fire Prevention 

Officer or CFA Regional office during a fire danger period. 100 Private 

landholders can be held liable for the cost of extinguishing any fires which 

escape onto public land. 101 

Management of the interface between public and private land, including 

community engagement in the planning and conduct of prescribed burning, 

is discussed further in Chapter Six. 

Legislative and regulatory arrangements for 

prescribed burning 

Legislation and the Code of Practice 

There are a number of state and Commonwealth legislative provisions of 

relevance to prescribed burning. The most significant provisions include: 

• s. 62(1) of the Forests Act 1958 (Vic), under which DSE is 

responsible for “the prevention and suppression of fire in every State 

forest and national park and on all protected public…”. The Act 

defines “protected public land” in section 3, as including State 

Forests, National and State parks, wilderness areas and Crown 

Reserve (which include areas managed by Alpine Resort 

Management Boards); 

• ss. 63 to 69 of the Forests Act 1958 (Vic), which contain DSE’s 

general powers in relation of fire suppression and prevention under 

the Act; 

• the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 (Vic), under which 

“inappropriate fire regimes causing disruption to sustainable 

ecosystem processes and resultant loss of biodiversity” are listed as 

a threatening process; 102 

• the Environment Protection Act 1970 (Vic), which creates a legislative 

framework for the protection of Victoria’s environment by reference to 

a range of principles, including: 

o the principle of integration of economic, social and 

environmental considerations, s. 1B; 

32 

99 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Burning off on Private Land', viewed 15 April 2008, 

. 

100 Country Fire Authority, 'Can I or Can't I?' viewed 15 April 2008, 

. 

101 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Burning off on Private Land', viewed 15 April 2008, 

. 

102 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Code of Practice for Fire Management on Public 

Land, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2006, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0275 


o the precautionary principle, s. 1C; 

o the principle of intergenerational equity, s. 1D; 

o the principle of conservation of biological diversity and 

ecological integrity, s. 1E; and 

o the principle of accountability, s. 1L. 

• the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 

(Cth); 103 and 

• s. 17(2)(b) of the National Parks Act 1975 (Vic). 

The primary regulatory instrument for prescribed burning on public land in 

Victoria is the Code of Practice for Fire Management on Public Land – 

Revision 1 (February 2006) (“the Code”). The Code is made under section 

31(1) of the Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987 and is the 

overarching document for both prescribed burning and bushfire suppression 

in Victoria. The Code replaces the Code of Practice for Fire Management on 

Public Land (1995) (“the 1995 Code”). 

The Code describes “minimum statewide standards” for the management of 

fire on public land in Victoria. More specific conditions are contained in a 

range of plans, instructions, prescriptions and guidelines, each of which 

must comply with the standards contained in the Code. 104 Three important 

DSE guidelines which are referenced in the Code, are the: 

• Fire Management Manual 10.1 Prescribed Burning (revised 2005) 

(‘the Prescribed Burning Manual’); 

• Synopsis of the knowledge used in prescribed burning in Victoria 

(1999); and the 

• Guidelines and Procedures for Ecological Burning on public land in 

Victoria (2004). 

The Code contains the following “general principles” in relation to prescribed 

burning: 

• prescribed burning, which is to be directed to the achievement of 

stated land management objectives, should be thoroughly planned, 

follow safe working practices, be controlled and have its outcomes 

monitored and recorded; 

• DSE will work with communities to promote understanding of the role 

of fire as a management tool in the Victorian environment; and 


Land, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2006, p. 4. 



33

RSCH.016.001.0276 


• prescribed burning activities and processes are to be planned in 

partnership with communities. 105 

The Code also provides that an approved Burn Plan must be prepared for 

every prescribed burn, which must include the following details (the full list of 

requirements are included at Appendix B of the Code): 

• the primary and secondary objectives of the burn; 

• the planned area to be burnt, including a map of the planned burn 

area; 

• any areas from which fire is to be excluded; 

• land tenures; 

• dominant vegetation type; 

• when the area was last burnt and by what type of fire (if known); 

• the limits of acceptable fire behaviour, weather and fuel conditions 

from the burn; and 

• relevant ecological issues. 106 

The Code supports a system of planning for fire management at Regional 

and District levels across Victoria. Fire Protection Plans, which set out 

overarching strategies for fire prevention and suppression, have been 

prepared for each DSE Fire District. Fire Protection Plans apply for a period 

of ten years but may be reviewed after five years and may be amended as 

required. The Code provides for a process of migration from Fire Protection 

Plans to Fire Management Plans, which will fulfil a broadly identical role to 

Fire Protection Plans. Fire Management Plans will, however, contain a 

number of additional elements, notably: 

• fire ecology strategies, prepared by public land managers (e.g. Parks 

Victoria) outlining overarching ecological and cultural protection 

goals; and 

• demonstrated links to relevant Municipal Fire Prevention Plans. 107 

The process of migration from Fire Protection Plans to Fire Management 

Plans is discussed further below. 

34 







RSCH.016.001.0277 


DSE Fire Regions, Fire Districts, and their associated Fire Protection Plans, 

are shown in Table 2.1 below. A map of current Fire Districts is shown in 

Figure 2.2 below. 

Table 2.1: DSE Fire Regions, Districts and Fire Protection 

Plans. 108 

DSE Fire 

Region 

DSE Fire District 


North West Bendigo Bendigo Fire Protection Plan 

Mildura 

Mildura Fire Protection Plan 

South West Bacchus Marsh Bacchus Marsh Fire Protection Plan 

North East 

Ballarat 

Horsham 

Otway 

Portland 

Alexandra 

Broadford 

Mansfield 

Ovens(Myrtleford) 

Shepparton 

(Wangaratta) 

Upper Murray 

(Tallangatta) 

Ballarat Fire Protection Plan 

Horsham Fire Protection Plan 

Otway Fire Protection Plan 

Portland Fire Protection Plan 

North East Fire Protection Plan - covering Alexandra and 

Broadford Fire Districts 

North East Fire Protection Plan - covering Upper Murray, 

Ovens, Shepparton and Mansfield Fire Districts 

Port Phillip Port Phillip East Port Phillip Fire Protection Plan 

Gippsland 

Bairnsdale 

Bendoc 

Cann River 

Erica 

Heyfield 

Noojee 

Nowa Nowa 

Orbost 

Swifts Creek 

Yarram 

Gippsland Fire Protection Plan - covering all 10 Fire 

Districts 

108 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Fire Protection Plans', viewed 9 April 2008, 

. 

35

RSCH.016.001.0278 


Figure 2.2: Map of DSE Fire Regions and Districts. 109 

The Code also requires the annual preparation of Fire Operations Plans, 

which are designed to implement the strategic goals contained in each Fire 

Protection Plan. Fire Operations Plans contain: 

• a three-year forward program, comprising a schedule and maps for 

fuel reduction and ecological burning; and 

• a schedule of prevention and preparedness works planned for the 

immediate 12 month budget period. 110 

Fire Operations Plans identify the priority areas which have been selected 

for fuel reduction and ecological burning. Fire Operations Plans also provide 

the flexibility to conduct, during any 12 month burning program, burns which 

have been identified for the entire three year period. 111 

Fire Protection Plans and Fire Operations Plans are prepared at District 

level by DSE, following an advertised period of community engagement. 

36 

109 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 20 June 2008. 



111 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 29 February 2008.

RSCH.016.001.0279 


Discussion 

The Code divides all public land in Victoria into four Fire Management Zones 

as follows: 

• the asset protection zone (FMZ 1); 

• the strategic wildfire moderation zone (FMZ 2); 

• the ecological management zone (FMZ 3); and 

• the prescribed burning exclusion zone (FMZ 4). 

The 1995 Code defined a total of five Fuel Management Zones: 

• asset protection (FMZ 1); 

• strategic fuel reduced corridors (FMZ 2); 

• broad area fuel reduced mosaic (FMZ 3); 

• specific flora and fauna management (FMZ 4); and 

• exclusion of prescribed burning (FMZ 5). 

At the time of writing, the recently approved Fire Protection Plan for Mildura 

was the first such plan to employ the revised four Fire Management Zone 

model. The Committee was advised that the new model would be 

implemented across DSE’s Fire Regions as existing Fire Protection Plans 

are revised towards the end of their ten year currency. 112 

The detailed objectives of prescribed burning within each zone are set out 

in the Code and in the 1995 Code respectively. In general, more intensive 

burning has been conducted in zones one and two for the purposes of asset 

protection, while most ecological burning has been conducted in zones three 

and four. 113 The Committee understands that under the new four zone 

model, ecological burning would largely be restricted to zone three. 

A common theme in the evidence provided to the Committee was that the 

legislation and regulations applicable to prescribed burning, and the 

management of public land in general, are overly restrictive, impractical and 

detract from the flexibility required for a successful fuel reduction burning 

program. 114 

The Committee also notes the observation of the Emergency Services 

Commissioner that: 

112 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168E, 4 April 2008, p. 3. 

113 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 29 February 2008. 

114 See for example: Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, Submission, no. 

24, 2 May 2007, p. 3; C. Schroeder, Submission, no. 76, 23 May 2007, p. 3; Warrnambool 4WD Club 

Inc., Submission, no. 126, 25 May 2007, p. 2; Timber Towns Victoria, Submission, no. 113, 25 May 

2007, p. 3. 

37

RSCH.016.001.0280 


…the quality of documented information could be further improved to provide greater 

clarity and accessibility to personnel who need to use it. 115 

The Committee also found, however, that the legislative and regulatory 

arrangements are of a high quality and represent a clear hierarchy. In this 

respect, the Committee agrees with the findings of the Emergency Services 

Commissioner in 2005 that: 

DSE’s requirements for prescribed burning are comprehensively described in 

legislation, government policy, departmental guidelines and instructions. The review 

finds no evidence of unsound processes in the documentation that would warrant a 

significant departure from those policies and procedures. 

While the legislative and regulatory arrangements governing prescribed 

burning in Victoria are complex, the Committee considers that a degree of 

complexity is inevitable if the risks and benefits of the program are to be 

appropriately balanced. However, the Committee agrees with the view 

expressed by a range of stakeholders that a flexible prescribed burning 

program is essential. The incorporation of local knowledge at every stage of 

the prescribed burning process is crucial to achieving such flexibility. For 

example, local knowledge may enable DSE and its partner agencies to 

conduct a greater number of burns outside of burn prescriptions (discussed 

below). 

The Committee also considers that further integration of the relevant 

documentation under the Code could be achieved, for example by collation 

in a single manual and by creating a webpage containing links to all 

regulatory documentation. 

As noted above, the Code provides for the migration from Fire Protection 

Plans to Fire Management Plans. DSE advised the Committee that the 

migration to Fire Management Plans was contingent on the development of 

Fire Ecology Strategies and of linkage documents for Municipal Fire 

Prevention Plans. DSE advised the Committee that it was aiming to advance 

the development of Fire Ecology Strategies in cooperation with Parks 

Victoria over the next three to five years and that the development of linkage 

documents for Municipal fire prevention plans was subject to the 

implementation of the Integrated Fire Management Planning Framework 

(IFMP), currently in its formative stages with primary carriage through the 

CFA. 116 The IFMP is discussed in detail in Chapter 6. 

Delegations and reporting responsibilities 

DSE has primary responsibility for prescribed burning on public land, which 

it plans and conducts with the assistance of a number of partner agencies, 

including DPI, Parks Victoria and VicForests. Within DSE there are a range 

of positions with defined responsibilities for prescribed burning. This 

hierarchy of responsibility is set out in DSE’s Fire Management Manual 10.1: 

38 

115 Emergency Services Commissioner, Examination of Prescribed Burning Practices, Office of the 

Emergency Services Commissioner, Melbourne, 2005, p. 5. 

116 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168E, 4 April 2008, p. 4.

RSCH.016.001.0281 


Prescribed Burning, (2001) (the Manual) and is illustrated in two flowcharts 

which have been reproduced as Figures 2.3 and 2.4 below. It should be 

noted, however, that there have been a number of structural and related 

changes within DSE since the Manual was last revised. For example, the 

Director Emergency Management is now known as the Chief Officer Fire 

and Emergency Management and currently reports to the new division of 

Land and Fire Management (which has assumed a number of the 

responsibilities of the former Parks and Forests division). 117 A further 

change which was recently proposed by DSE is the establishment of a direct 

line of accountability between the Regional Manager Fire and the Chief Fire 

Officer throughout the year. Responsibility for the position of Manager Fire is 

currently shared between the Chief Fire Officer and Regional Director 

outside of fire management operations. 118 

Departmental Secretary 

The Secretary is responsible for the provision of fire prevention and 

suppression works in State forests, national parks and other protected public 

land in Victoria under Section 62(2) of the Forests Act 1958. The Secretary 

is also required to ensure that proper measures are taken to protect each 

national park, State forest and other parks from injury by fire under the 

National Parks Act 1975. 

Fire and Emergency Management 

The Chief Officer Fire and Emergency Management (previously known as 

the Director Emergency Management) holds the delegated responsibility, 

from the Secretary of DSE, for fire emergencies on public land in Victoria. 

The Chief Officer Fire and Emergency Management is also responsible for 

the preparation and amendment of DSE’s Fire Management Manuals and 

works with relevant DSE divisions and partner agencies (DPI, Parks Victoria 

and VicForests) to achieve this. 119 


118 P. Harris, Secretary, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of evidence, 

Melbourne, 7 April 2008. 

119 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Fire Management Manual 10.1: Prescribed 

Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 2_1. 

39

RSCH.016.001.0282 


Figure 2.3: Departmental responsibilities for fire 

management on public land in Victoria. 120 

Secretary Department of Sustainability and Environment 

Deputy Secretary Land Stewardship and Biodiversity 

Deputy Secretary Resources and Regional Services 

Executive Director 

Parks and Forests 

Executive Director 

Regional Services 

Director 

Parks and Forests Programs 

Director 

Emergency Management 

Regional Director 

Secretary 

Department of Primary 

Industries 

Chief Executive Officer 

VicForests 

Chief Executive 

Parks Victoria 

Manager Fire 


Regional Forest Manager 

Forest Management Plan 

Chief Operations Officer 

Timber Release Plan 

Forest Operations Manager 

Operations Plan 

Regional Manager 

Park Management Plan 

Forest Manager/Forest and 

Biodiversity 

Manager/District 

Coordinator 

Wood Utilisation Plan 

Senior Forest Officer 

Forest Coupe Plan 

Fire Management Officer 

Fire Operations Plan 

Forest Officer 

Forest Coupe Plan 

Officer in Charge 

Burn Plan 

Note: Solid lines show delegation of authority / responsibility; dotted lines show reporting 

relationships. 

40 


Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 2_2.

RSCH.016.001.0283 


Figure 2.4: Management structure and reporting 

relationships for prescribed burns. 121 

Director Emergency 

State Fire Controller 

Regional Fire Controller 

District Fire Coordinator 

Burns Controller 

Planning 

Operations 

Logistics 

Weather 

Burn OIC 

Burn OIC 

Burn OIC 

Fuel 

Briefing 

Lighting Crew Leader Patrol Crew Air 

Vehicles 

Tech Support 

Crew 

Crew 

Catering 

Fire and Emergency Management is also responsible for the: 

• preparation, review, modification and approval of the Prescribed 

Burning Manual and an associated template for Burn Plans; 

• defining the skills and authorisation required by those involved in the 

conduct of prescribed burns; 

• defining a process for monitoring and recording details of prescribed 

burning operations; and 

• recording the annual expenditure on prescribed burning. 122◊ 





◊ According to the Manual, responsibility for these activities is held by the Manager Preparedness and 

Response (Emergency Management) on the delegated authority of the Chief Officer Fire and 

Emergency Management. 

41

RSCH.016.001.0284 


Figure 2.5: Current structure of DSE. 123 

Secretary 

Department of Sustainability and Environment 

Under Secretary and Chief Executive 

Office of Water 

General Manager 

Office of Water 

Deputy Secretary 

Deputy Secretary 

General Manager 

Corporate Services 

Executive 

Director 

Land 

Victoria 

Regional 

Director 

Port Phillip 

Regional 

Director 

North East 

Regional 

Director 

North 

West 

Regional 

Director 

South 

West 

Regional 

Director 

Gippsland 

Executive 

Director 

Environmental 

Policy & 

Climate Change 

Executive 

Director 

Capital 

Projects 

Executive 

Director Land 

& Fire 


Executive 

Director 

Public Land 

Division 

Executive 

Director 

Biodiversity 

& 

Ecosystem 

Services 

Executive 

Director 

Natural 

Resources 

Ministerial 

Services 

Chief 

Information 

Officer 

Information and 

Business 

Technology 

Director 

Communications 

Director 

Planning & 

Performance 

Director 

Risk and 

Insurance 

Chief 

Legal 

Officer 

Chief 

Finance 

Officer 

Director 

Human 

Resources 

Manager 

Infrastructure 

and Facilities 

The role of the Chief Officer Fire and Emergency Management in the 

conduct of prescribed burning arises out of the requirement that prescribed 

burns be managed under the incident control principles of the Australasian 

Inter-service Incident Management System (AIIMS). 124 The Manual states 

that this arrangement is designed to ensure that there is a management 

structure in place which is consistent with that for wildfire suppression as a 

safeguard for prescribed burn escapes which become wildfires. 125 The 

Committee notes that the introduction of the AIIMS approach to structuring 

the reporting relationships for prescribed burning has effectively 

implemented a 2005 recommendation of the Emergency Services 

Commissioner in relation to the improvement of risk management processes 

42 

123 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 16 April 2008. 





RSCH.016.001.0285 


for prescribed burning. 126 As noted above, however, DSE plans to change 

the existing reporting relationships to make Regional Managers Fire directly 

accountable to the Chief Fire Officer at all times. 

Regional Director and Manager Fire 

The Secretary also delegates responsibility for prescribed burning to 

Regional Directors who in turn delegate responsibility to the Manager Fire 

for each region for the following matters: 

• ensuring relevant land managers are engaged and consulted 

regarding all burns on public land; 

• approving Fire Operations Plans; 

• preparing, distributing, reviewing and modifying Burn Plans; 

• implementing Burn Plans; 

• ensuring that all appropriate information and actions are recorded; 

• reviewing on-ground performance against objectives of Burn Plans; 

• ensuring corrective action if burns do not achieve their burn 

objectives; 

• implementing quality control processes to manage risk, including the 

internal approval process; 

• approving burns located near significant private or public assets; 

burns ignited between November to February inclusive; and burns 

which are outside of the standard prescriptions; 

• ensuring the risk mitigation process (Guideline 10.1.10) is 

satisfactorily completed; 

• approving the commencement of the seasonal prescribed burning 

program in the region; and 

• ensuring mineral earth control lines are in place around the perimeter 

of the Burning Unit prior to ignition for burns conducted between 

November and February inclusive unless specific approval is 

otherwise granted. 127 

“Manager Fire” is described in the Manual as a “generic” term for the role to 

which a Regional Director has directly delegated fire management 


Emergency Services Commissioner, Melbourne, 2005, pp. 9-10. 


Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, pp. 2_3 to 2_4. 

43

RSCH.016.001.0286 


responsibilities for the region. The actual title of the person fulfilling this role 

may vary from region to region. 128 

Fire Management Officer 

Managers Fire delegate the following responsibilities to Fire Management 

Officers: 

• approving nominated burns and allocating burn numbers; 

• ensuring Burn Plans are prepared and entered on FireWeb (an 

intranet system which provides DSE's primary source of integrated 

fire management information), including fuel reduction burns and land 

manager-commissioned burns; 

• ensuring all prescribed burns have an approved Burn Plan before 

ignition; 

• ensuring that all areas planned to be burned are first inspected to 

assess and prescribe any protective measures required to protect 

persons and assets; 

• ensuring that appropriate indices are recorded for fuel conditions and 

fire danger; 

• ensuring consistency of the proposed burn with the relevant Fire 

Protection Plan (or Fire Management Plan) and Fire Operations Plan; 

• ensuring that all prescribed burning is in accordance with the Manual; 

• consulting with any relevant land manager; 

• approving all fuel reduction Burn Plans; 

• ensuring that approval is sought for burns near significant private or 

public assets, burns ignited between November to February inclusive, 

and burns outside prescriptions; 

• ensuring appropriate actions are taken in the event of a burn escape; 

and 

• in conjunction with Officer in Charge, ensuring that actions are taken 

to satisfy rehabilitation requirements. 129 

Land Manager 

44 


Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 2_1.; Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 29 February 2008. 



RSCH.016.001.0287 


For prescribed burning for purposes other than fuel reduction burning, the 

relevant land manager is responsible for: 

• ensuring ecological burns meet the objectives of park or forest 

management plans and ecological burning strategies; 

• ensuring all burns are nominated on FireWeb; 

• ensuring that all burns go through a strategic planning process (such 

as a Wood Utilisation Plan, Timber Release Plan or Fire Operations 

Plan); 

• ensuring that all burns go through an operational planning process, 

i.e. Burn Plans are prepared and entered on FireWeb for all land 

manager-commissioned prescribed burns; 

• ensuring consistency of all proposals with the relevant strategic 

plans; 

• approving all land manager-commissioned Burn Plans; 

• ensuring that all areas planned to be burned are inspected prior to 

burning to assess and prescribe any protective measures required to 

protect persons and assets in or near the burn area; 

• obtaining the endorsement of the local Fire Management Officer 

(otherwise the burn will be considered to be unauthorised); 

• monitoring the effects of prescribed burning; 

• in conjunction with the Officer in Charge of the Burn, ensuring that 

actions are taken to satisfy rehabilitation requirements; and 

• paying for the conduct of the operation. 

Officer in Charge of the Burn (Burn OIC) 

This is the person charged with managing a given prescribed burn – he or 

she may be the Fire Management Officer, Land Manager and/or any other 

person who meets the required competencies (the required accreditation for 

the Burn OIC and for any other personnel involved in prescribed burning is 

set out in Section 2.5 of the Manual). 

The Burn OIC is responsible for: 

• being in possession of the approved Burn Plan on the day of the 

burn; 

• meeting all prescriptions and conditions specified in the Burn Plan; 

• providing “current status” information to the Burns Controller; 

45

RSCH.016.001.0288 


• certifying that all notifications and planning requirements have been 

completed prior to ignition; 

• verifying and recording that conditions and preparations at the site of 

the burn are within the appropriate prescriptions and conditions for 

the burn; 

• authorising ignitions; 

• ensuring that the public and assets are protected at all times 

(including passing traffic); 

• before leaving, ensuring that the perimeter of the burn is secure from 

fire escaping and that dangerous trees do not fall or encroach onto 

roads before the next scheduled patrol; 

• completing relevant details on FireWeb; and 

• in conjunction with the Land Manager and Fire Management Officer 

as appropriate, ensuring that actions are taken to satisfy rehabilitation 

requirements. 130 

Burns Controller 

The Burns Controller, which is delegated at Regional level, may be the Fire 

Management Officer, an employee of a land manager, or any other person 

charged with management of multiple prescribed burns who meets the 

accreditation standard (detailed in Section 2.5 of the Manual). The Burns 

Controller is responsible for the overall management of multiple prescribed 

burning operations and the supervision and coordination of Burn OICs’ 

prescribed fires within their respective planning area. Specific duties include: 

• implementing Departmental procedures, policies and regulations for 

prescribed burning operations and ensuring Burn OICs are 

conducting their burns in a safe manner according to specific policies 

and standards; 

• determining whether or not to give appropriate authorisation for 

commencement of any particular burn or burning program; 

• reviewing Burn Plans prior to implementation; 

• determining sequence for ignition of individual burns and advising 

Burn OICs as appropriate; 

• obtaining and interpreting long term weather information; 

• managing air quality issues and liaison with State Fire Coordinator 

regarding consideration; 

46 



RSCH.016.001.0289 


• briefing and instructing Burn OICs on operational procedures, 

objectives and hazards relevant to the current program; 

• coordinating resource requests including the requesting, use and 

release of resources; 

• acting as liaison/coordinator between DSE and other agencies, State 

Aircraft Unit, news media, interested public and landowners; 

• monitoring effectiveness of burns in relation to achievement of stated 

burn objectives (i.e. ‘secondary objective’); 

• coordinating the termination of burns if smoke, resource and/or fire 

management objectives are not being met; 

• as necessary, declaring escapes from prescribed fires to be wildfires 

per DSE guidelines, if not already done so by assigned Burn OIC; 

• maintaining FireWeb Burns & Works record including burn status 

changes and ensuring completed Burn Plans are returned from Burn 

OICs and stored appropriately; and 

• ensuring evaluation and documentation of the achievement of burn 

objectives, operational procedures and assigned personnel as related 

to fire and resource management planning. 

The Manual provides that authorisation to ignite a burn is to be requested on 

the day before the burn. Authorisation may be subject to particular 

conditions and may be overridden or withdrawn by the State Fire 

Coordinator or Regional Fire Coordinator. 131 

Authorisation must be given by either the Fire Management Officer (FMO) or 

the Manager Fire, depending on: 

• whether the burn meets the standard prescriptions (based on weather 

forecasts and preparation); 

• the timing of the burn; 

• whether the burn is within 500m of significant private or public assets; 

and 

• the current wildfire and prescribed burning situation on a State, 

Regional and District basis. 132 

The influence of these factors on the required level of authorisation is shown 

in Figure 2.6. 

131 Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Fire Management Manual 10.1: Prescribed 




47

RSCH.016.001.0290 


Following authorisation, FireWeb is updated by changing the status of the 

burn to “Ignition Authorised” and entering the details of the burn 

authorisation. 133 

Authorisation for prescribed burns which are adjacent to significant private 

or public assets, or which may impact on public safety, is contingent on the 

Manager Fire first ensuring that a risk mitigation process has been 

completed (outlined in Guideline 10.1.10) and that adequate mitigation 

strategies have been put in place. 134 

All authorisations to ignite a burn are required to be in writing and the Burn 

OIC must be in possession of a copy of the authorised Burn Plan at the time 

of ignition and for the duration of the burn. 

The Manual contains a checklist for the planning and conduct of prescribed 

burns (Guideline 10.1.13), which is required to be completed for each burn 

on public land and retained as part of the burn record unless advised 

otherwise. 

48 





RSCH.016.001.0291 


Figure 2.6: Authorisation to ignite a burn. 135 

Ready status 

Within period Dec 15 

to Feb 28 

Yes 

No 

Within 500m of 

significant private or 

public assets 

Yes 

Within standard prescriptions 

and constraints 

No 

Within standard prescriptions 

and constraints 

Additional ‘conditions’ 

may be added 

No 

Yes 

No 

Yes 

Manager Fire authorisation 

required (may delegate further to 

Assistant Manager Fire. No 

further delegation permitted) 

Manager Fire (or 

approved written 

delegate) authorisation 

required 

FMO authorisation 

required 

Prescriptions are the acceptable limits of factors (e.g. temperature, fuel moisture content, wind speed 

etc.) fore a particular burn class approved by Fire Management Officer. 

Constraints are additional requirements (i.e. additional to the prescriptions) imposed by the Manager 

Fire or other officers as appropriate. 

The Committee finds that while the reporting structure for the conduct of 

prescribed burning is complex, it provides an appropriate system of risk 

management for an inherently complex land management practice. While 

the Committee appreciates the concerns of a number of stakeholders that 

there is an unnecessary degree of complexity in the chain of command, the 

Committee finds that a level of complexity in this regard is inevitable. The 

Committee notes that, appropriately, the decision to authorise and ignite a 

burn occurs at Regional level. Moreover, the Committee welcomes the 

recent statement by DSE that Regional Managers Fire will in future report 

directly to the Chief Fire Officer year round, rather than being jointly 

accountable to Regional Directors. 136 

Finding 2.1: 

The Committee finds that while the legislative, regulatory and reporting 

structures for the planning and conduct of prescribed burning activities are 

complex, they provide an appropriate system of risk management for an 

inherently complex land management practice. 





49

RSCH.016.001.0292 


Theoretical foundations 

The primary source for the theoretical foundations which underpin 

prescribed burning in Victoria is DSE’s Synopsis of the knowledge used in 

prescribed burning in Victoria (1999) (“the Synopsis”). 137 The Synopsis 

provides an overview of the relevant scientific research and field experience 

and describes the prescribed burning techniques currently in use. 138 

Broadly, these techniques involve variations in: ignition patterns; ignition 

times; and ignition tools. 

In order to understand how these techniques are applied, an appreciation of 

the interrelated effects of the following factors is also required: 

• fire behaviour; 

• fuels; 

• fire weather; and 

• topography. 

Each of the above can have a bearing on the planning, conduct and 

outcome of a prescribed burn. The following outline provides only a broad 

overview of these factors. For further detail the reader is referred to the 

Synopsis. 

Fire behaviour 

Ignition and combustion 

The main factors affecting ignition are the moisture content of the fuel and 

the nature of the fuel bed. According to field observations, ignition from 

extremely small sparks and glowing combustion occurs only when the 

moisture content of the fuel falls below six per cent. 139 

The effect of wind on combustion 

Increases in wind speed cause an increase in the rate of combustion. 

However, head fires (see below) which consumed less fuel through flaming 

combustion than backing fires (see below) have also been observed in 

forest. This is thought to be caused by differences in the way the fuel burns 

– head fires burn from the top of the fuel bed while backing fires tend to burn 

50 

137 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Prescribed Burning Activities', viewed 29 March 

2008, . 

138 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Prescribed Burning Activities', viewed 29 March 

2008, . 



RSCH.016.001.0293 


into the fuel bed and may even burn upwards from the bottom of the fuel 

bed. 140 

The heat transfer process 

Combustion is maintained by heat, which is transferred by the processes of 

radiation, conduction and convection. The dominant heat transfer process in 

forest fires is convection, which influences fire development and the speed 

at which a fire spreads. Convection can be used to manipulate prescribed 

fires to achieve particular results, such as the degree of scorch or damage 

to the crowns of the overstorey. 141 

The fire perimeter 

In level terrain with homogenous fuels and no wind, a fire tends to spread 

equally in all directions. However, the presence of wind or slope will 

generally cause the fire to lean towards the unburnt fuels situated uphill or 

downwind of the fire, increasing the rate at which the fire spreads in those 

directions. In these conditions, the fastest moving section of the fire 

perimeter is referred to as the head fire, which is also the area which tends 

to draw the heat from the other sections of the fire perimeter. The section of 

the fire perimeter directly opposite the head fire is the back fire, which is the 

slowest moving part of the fire. The flank fire, which is parallel to the 

prevailing wind or slope, is the area of the fire perimeter located between the 

head fire and the back fire. Flames on the flank fire alternate between 

heading fires and backing fires with changes in the prevailing wind direction. 

Figure 2.7 illustrates the fire perimeter for fires originating from a point 

ignition and a line ignition and shows the approximate proportion of the area 

burnt by head fire, flank fire and back fire. 142 


Victoria, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, p. 5. 


Victoria, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, pp. 5-8. 



51

RSCH.016.001.0294 


Figure 2.7: Fire perimeter. 143 

Fire growth phases 

Fire growth refers to the development of a fire to its maximum potential rate 

of spread under the prevailing conditions. The process depends on the 

development of flames into the surface fuel bed, the development of 

convection, the development of flames into elevated and bark fine fuels, and 

the development of the width and shape of the head fire. The ignition pattern 

and the type of ignition used can both influence the rate of fire growth. 144 

Flame characteristics 

Flame characteristics include flame height, length, angle and depth. A 

further characteristic is “residence time”, which refers to the duration of 

flaming combustion. Relationships between flame height and rate of spread 

are often used in burning guides but these cannot be applied to fuel types 

that are structurally dissimilar. 145 

Fire shape 

Following the development of a head fire, convection becomes the dominant 

heat transfer process. The convective updraught from the fire tends to 

constrain the fire within a roughly elliptical shape (subject to the presence of 

fuels which are continuous and relatively uniform and a constant wind 

52 






Victoria, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, pp. 14-16.

RSCH.016.001.0295 


direction). The proportions of an ellipse shaped fire are determined by the 

prevailing wind speed, as illustrated in Figure 2.8 below. 146 

Figure 2.8: The effects of wind speed on fire shape. 147◊ 

Rate of spread 

The rate at which a fire spreads is affected by a number of variables, 

including: the type, arrangement and quantity of fuel; the dead fuel moisture 

content; wind speed at the fire front; the overall width of the fire; and ground 

slope. 148 

Spotting 

Spotting refers to the creation of sparks or embers which are carried by the 

wind or convective activity to ignite new fires. 149 Bark in eucalypt forests can 

provide the fuel for spotting even in relatively mild conditions. In some 

cases, spotting can cause the ignition of new fires several kilometres distant. 

The onset of spotting in many fuel types can make suppression impossible. 

Guidelines for the suppression limits (i.e. maximum fire intensities) 

applicable for: fire fighters using hand tools; bulldozers; and air tankers, 

have been defined by reference to the intensity at which spotting across a 

constructed fire line can no longer be contained. Massive spotting across 

short distances and some long distance spotting have been identified as a 

major reason for the failure of first attack efforts in Victoria. Overcoming 

discontinuities in fuel and topography has been identified as the most 





◊ The results shown are for wind speeds measured at 1.5 metres above the ground in forest. 





53

RSCH.016.001.0296 


significant effect of spotting, allowing a bushfire to burn across divided 

country with apparently minimal impediment under extreme conditions. 150 

Spotting across control lines is the most common cause of escapes from 

prescribed burns in Victoria. 151 

Fire intensity and heat output 

Fire intensity is defined as the rate of energy release for a given unit of fire 

perimeter. It is commonly defined mathematically as the heat (measured in 

kilowatts) that is released per metre of fire perimeter and is classified as: low 

(

RSCH.016.001.0297 


Figure 2.9: Fire intensity and heat output. 155 

Byrams Fireline Intensity 

I = H.W.R (equation 2.1) 

where: 

I = fireline intensity (kW/m) 

H = heat content of fuel (kJ/kg) 

Approximately 18,600 kJ/kg 

W = weight of fuel burnt per unit area (kg/m 2 ) 

R = rate of fire spread (m/s) 

Total heat released 

H A = H.W (equation 2.2) 

where: 

H A = total heat released per unit area (Kj/m 2 ) 

H = heat content of fuel (kJ/kg) 

W = weight of fuel burnt per unit area (kg/m 2 ) 

Junction zones 

A junction zone is an area where two fire edges meet, resulting in rapid 

combustion and a significant increase in flame height and intensity. The 

intensity and size of junction zones in a prescribed burn can be reduced by 

spacing the ignition points at a sufficient distance to prevent them joining 

before weather conditions have moderated. Ignition points can be spaced 

closer together to have the opposite effect. 156 

Fire whirls 

Fire whirls are vortices of ascending hot air and gases, which rise from a fire 

carrying smoke, debris and flame, and which may pose challenges for both 

safety and fire containment at prescribed burns. They are common during 

high intensity prescribed burning if the atmosphere is unstable. 157 

Smoke 

Smoke comprises water vapour, particulates (tar, ash, carbon, unburnt fuel 

fragments), and gases (CO 2 , N 2 O, S 2 O, NH 3 , CH 4 , NO x , ozone and other 

non-methane hydrocarbons). Particulates are the product of incomplete 

combustion. Over half of the total mass of particulates is made up of tar 







55

RSCH.016.001.0298 


Fuels 

droplets with the remainder being crystalline ash and carbon particles which 

may also contain absorbed hydrocarbons. The proportion of fuel converted 

to particulates is around 0.44 per cent for high-intensity fires under very dry 

conditions and around two to four per cent for low-intensity fires during mild 

weather conditions. An average of around 1.5 to two per cent of the total 

weight of fuel consumed is converted to smoke. 158 The issue of smoke 

produced from prescribed burning is discussed in further detail later in this 

chapter. 

Total fuel 

The Synopsis describes fuel as “the most important factor” influencing fire 

behaviour. Total fuel is defined as the maximum quantity of combustible 

material that is burnt under the most extreme conditions. Available fuel 

refers to the proportion of the total fuel that is consumed when fuel and 

weather conditions are less than extreme. Available fuel depends on a 

range of factors and cannot be measured prior to the occurrence of a fire. 

Instead, it must be estimated from current and preceding weather and 

therefore “presents a major problem in quantifying fuels for fire behaviour 

predictions”. 159 

Fuel size and arrangement 

The rate of spread of a fire and its flame dimensions are influenced only by 

certain components of the total fuel. Fine fuels (e.g. grass, leaves, twigs etc. 

of

RSCH.016.001.0299 


• near-surface fine fuels; 

• elevated fine fuels; 

• bark fine fuels; 

• canopy fine fuels; 

• coarse surface fuels; and 

• coarse standing fuels (usually dead standing trees but includes dead 

limbs on live trees and hollow live trees). 162 

The location of fuel components within a forest is illustrated in Figure 2.10 

below. 

Figure 2.10: Components of forest fuels. 163 





57

RSCH.016.001.0300 


Fuel and fire behaviour 

According to the Synopsis: 

the complexity of forest fuels makes it difficult to identify and measure simple 

characteristics that can be used to predict fire behaviour. Even with relatively simple 

fuels such as grasslands, variables that are significant in laboratory experiments 

have little effect in the field. 164 

Moreover, the Synopsis notes that fuel of increasing size has a greater 

influence on forest fire behaviour as fire intensity and wind speed increase, 

so that: 

it is unlikely that a single measure of fuel, e.g. fuel load, will be a good predictor 

variable over the full range of fire intensities, and over a range of fuel structures as 

fuels increase with age. 165 

The Synopsis also notes that studies of the effect of fuel quantity on rate of 

spread are limited and provide conflicting findings but nevertheless 

concludes that: 

broad area prescribed burning changes a number of fuel characteristics that will 

result in reduced rate of spread, reduced spotting, reduced flame heights, reduced 

fire intensity and increased ease of suppression for a period of time following the 

burn. 166 

Fuel accumulation 

The Synopsis outlines the use of fuel accumulation curves, which have been 

developed for different types of forests. These predict the rate at which 

surface fine fuels and elevated fuels accumulate following a fire and the time 

taken to reach equilibrium fuel loads (the point at which the rate of 

decomposition prevents further fuel build-up). In dry sclerophyll forests fuel 

loads increase rapidly for the first ten years before reaching an equilibrium 

fuel load of around 15 tonnes per hectare (although the elevated fuel load 

may continue to increase for a further 25 years). In wet sclerophyll forests 

fuel may accumulate for up to 30 years before attaining an equilibrium fuel 

load of around 30 tonnes per hectare. 167 

Fuel moisture content 

The Synopsis defines fuel moisture content as “the proportion of free and 

absorbed water in the fuel” expressed as a percentage of its “oven dry 

58 









RSCH.016.001.0301 


weight” (i.e. the weight of the fuel after being dried at 105 ° C until any further 

weight loss has ceased). 168 

The importance of fuel moisture content is explained in the Synopsis in the 

following terms: 

Fuel moisture content affects the ease of ignition, fire spread rate, fire intensity, 

smoke properties, fuel consumption, spotting and plant mortality or scorch. Fuel 

moisture is so important that it forms a foundation for many fire danger rating 

systems… 169 

Fuel moisture content also affects the rate at which fuel will burn, while the 

distribution of moisture in the fuel bed affects the amount of fuel that is 

available to burn. 170 

In general, a fire’s rate of spread is most affected by the dead fine fuels. 

Accordingly, the moisture content of these fuels is critical to the prediction of 

fire behaviour and to the planning and conduct of prescribed burns. 171 

Two measurements of the moisture content of surface fine fuels are used 

when planning a prescribed burn. The first of these is the surface moisture 

content, the second is the profile moisture content (i.e. the average moisture 

content of the entire litter bed). The Synopsis explains the way in which 

these measurements are used when planning prescribed burns of differing 

intensity as follows: 

Low intensity prescribed fire in eucalypt fuels is usually best conducted when the 

surface moisture content is between 9% and 16%. The lower layers of the litter bed 

may be much moister than this (>20%), which is usually desirable so that some litter 

is left to protect the soil from erosion and to protect some of the litter decay 

organisms (Tolhurst et al, 1992). For high intensity prescribed fires such as 

regeneration burns, the surface moisture content may be as low as about 6% within 

the prescribed area, but the surface moisture content in the adjacent undisturbed 

forest needs to be above 14% to limit the chance of spot fires and the fire escaping 

outside the prescribed area. 172 

The fuel moisture content of elevated fuels is also important in areas such 

as heathlands or forests with a wiregrass understorey. 173 

Dead coarse fuel moisture and live fuel moisture are also factors in fire 

behaviour. 174 













59

RSCH.016.001.0302 


A variety of methods have been developed to measure or estimate fuel 

moisture content. The standard method is oven-dry determination which 

involves drying to a constant weight at a defined temperature. This method 

is susceptible to variations of one to two per cent. The two field-based 

techniques used in Victoria are: 

• the Speedy Moisture Meter, which measures the moisture content of 

a soil sample; and 

• the T-H Fine Fuel Moisture Meter, which measures the electrical 

resistance of a ground sample. 

Other methods of moisture assessment noted in the Synopsis include 

laboratory based techniques, fuel analogues, meteorological models and 

remote sensing. 175 

Assessing the Overall Fuel Hazard 

The basis for assessing fuel hazards is DSE’s Overall Fuel Hazard Guide 

(1999) (“the Guide”). The Guide is used by prescribed burn supervisors (and 

during bushfire suppression operations), to asses the “Overall Fuel Hazard”, 

which is defined as: 

Overall Fuel Hazard = (the sum of the influences of) Bark Hazard+ Elevated Fuel 

Hazard + Surface Fine Fuel Hazard 176 

The Guide defines five levels of hazard for each fuel type: low; moderate; 

high; very high; and extreme, and provides a photographic guide for the 

purposes of assessment. 

Fuel hazard levels are then defined for Fuel Management Zones One to 

Three, with the protection requirements of each zone to be met by 

“maintaining each fuel component at or below the following maximum 

levels”: 177 

FMZ 1 

Moderate Overall 

• Surface Fine Fuel Moderate (litter bed height 15-25 mm); 

• Bark Fuel High (unless Surface Fine Low); and 

• Elevated Fuel High. 

FMZ 2 

High Overall 

60 





176 G. J. McCarthy, K. G. Tolhurst and K. Chatto, Overall Fuel Hazard Guide: Fire Management 

Report No: 47, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, p. iii. 


Report No: 47, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, p. 26.

RSCH.016.001.0303 


• Surface Fine Fuel High (litter bed height 25-35 mm); 

• Bark Fuel High (unless Surface Fine Low); and 

• Elevated Fuel High. 

FMZ 3 High Overall on 50% 

• Surface Fine Fuel High (litter bed height 25-35 mm) on 50% of the 

zone 

• Bark Fuel High on 50% of the zone (unless Surface Fine Low); and 

• Elevated Fuel High on 50% of the zone. 178 

The approach set out in the Guide represents a significant change to the 

way in which fuel hazards and their fire behaviour effects were previously 

assessed. Previously, surface fine fuel loads (in tonnes per hectare) 

provided the sole measure of fuel hazard. The new approach places the 

emphasis on the entire fuel complex, particularly the bark and elevated 

fuels, the fuel elements which are primarily responsible for both first attack 

failure and general suppression difficulty. 179 

Fire weather 

Fire weather describes the effects of both climate and weather on the 

probability that a fire will ignite, its subsequent behaviour and the difficulty of 

suppression. The Synopsis identifies a variety of factors which influence fire 

weather, including: 

• long-term weather cycles, produced by variations in weather from 

year to year, due to phenomena such as the El Nino effect and 

drought; 

• seasonal cycles, which produce significant variations in temperature, 

wind and rainfall patterns; 

• diurnal (i.e. daily) cycles; and 

• short term and local weather effects, which include cold fronts, wind 

gustiness and directional variability, horizontal wind profiles and 

jets. 180 

The Synopsis describes diurnal cycles in particular as having: 


Report No: 47, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, p. 26. 


Report No: 47, Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1999, p. iii. 



61

RSCH.016.001.0304 


Topography 

…profound effects on fire behaviour…[which]…must be understood if fires are to be 

prescribed or suppressed successfully. 181 

The factors involved in diurnal cycles include: 

• temperature and humidity; 

• wind speed and direction (noted in the Synopsis as having 

“potentially the most immediate and significant short-term influence 

on prescribed burns with the exception of rain”); 

• atmospheric stability, which has an affect on fire intensity and which 

can include the formation of inversion layers (a stable layer of air 

where temperature increases with height); 

• sea breezes and land breezes; and 

• katabatic and anabatic winds (katabatic winds occur in mountainous 

areas on cloudless nights and involve the movement of cooler air 

down slope; anabatic winds are the result of the opposite process 

during the day – both are used to control prescribed burning in 

mountainous areas). 182 

Topography refers to variations in the land surface according to: slope 

steepness (as a general rule a fire’s rate of spread doubles with each 10 

degrees of slope); aspect; elevation; and landscape pattern (such as 

rockiness and the continuity of fuels). Variations in topography can have 

dramatic effects on fire behaviour as well as influencing variations in local 

fuel and weather conditions. 183 

Prescribed burning techniques 

With the above outline of the factors influencing bushfires and prescribed 

burns in mind, an overview of the prescribed burning techniques described 

in the Synopsis can be now be placed in context. As noted above, the main 

techniques of prescribed burning in Victoria outlined in the Synopsis include: 

control lines; ignition patterns; ignition times; and ignition tools. 

Control lines 

Control lines are constructed barriers (e.g. a mineral earth trail built by 

bulldozer, freshly slashed heath or grass, or a wet line created by foam or a 

retardant strip) or natural barriers such as rocky outcrops or wet gullies. The 

location of control lines is described in the Synopsis as one of the most 

62 







RSCH.016.001.0305 


important decisions for a successful prescribed burn. Moreover, a control 

line is required to prevent the spread of fire under the conditions prescribed 

for that fire as well as under more severe conditions that may arise on 

subsequent days. Control lines may also be based solely on a fuel moisture 

differential but these are most likely to be effective during late Autumn, 

especially since smouldering logs may cause re-ignitions many weeks after 

a burn during periods of high fire danger. A prescribed burn that has been 

well planned will include a contingency plan, consisting of a fallback control 

line and, in most cases, the capacity to drive fire suppression vehicles along 

the control line to reach any areas of spotting. 184 

Buffer zones may also be established in the area beyond the control line to 

provide additional fuel reduction treatments or vehicle access, although 

these are more commonly used around high-intensity prescribed burns. 185 

Edging is a type of buffer zone which is used for large aerially ignited 

prescribed burns. It involves burning the perimeter of a block during mild 

conditions such as the Autumn prior to the prescribed burn. 186 

Ignition patterns 

The Synopsis describes the ignition pattern as critical to the success of a 

prescribed burn and notes that fire intensities can be increased or reduced 

by a factor of five, according to the chosen pattern. 187 Ignition patterns are 

often varied to accommodate weather, fuel and topography, and therefore 

call for a skilled and disciplined lighting crew and fire controller. The 

Synopsis notes that there are a number of recognised ignition patterns with 

“countless” variations. The most common ignition patterns, a number of 

which are illustrated in Figure 2.11 below, are: 

• backing fire ignition; 

• spot fire ignition; 

• strip head ignition; 

• chevron fire ignition; 

• centre fire ignition; 

• ring or perimeter fire ignition; and 









63

RSCH.016.001.0306 


• area ignition. 188 

Backing fire ignition is used to minimise the fire intensity and maximise the 

degree of control. It reduces scorch to the overstorey, maximises the 

proportion of fuel burnt and reduces spotting. A disadvantage of this pattern, 

however, is its slow burning rate, resulting in a longer time to burn out a 

given area. 189 

Spot fire ignition is often used for low-intensity prescribed fires in forests and 

logging slash on hilly terrain where centre firing cannot be applied. Altering 

the spacing of the lighting grid allows the intensity of the fire to be adjusted. 

Fire intensity can also be minimised by the spacing of spots so that fires link 

up during the evening when conditions are cooler. This ignition pattern 

results in around 30 per cent of the total area being burnt with the intensity 

of a head fire. The Synopsis notes that this method allows relatively large 

areas to be burnt at comparatively low cost. However, a possible 

disadvantage involves access and safety where ignition is ground based 

and there is dense understorey or difficult terrain. On the other hand, this 

ignition pattern is described as especially adaptable to aerial ignition. 190 

Strip head fire ignition produces a more intense fire than spot fire ignition 

and may be used when conditions are too mild to enable a fire to run with 

spot fires or where a higher intensity fire is needed to achieve the 

management objectives for the burn area. This method results in 80 to 90 

per cent of the area being burnt with the intensity of a head fire. In general, 

increasing the number of lines of fire increases the overall intensity of the 

fire due to the interaction between the lines. This method is generally 

conducted on the ground and by hand – it is comparatively more expensive 

than spot ignition. 191 

Chevron fire ignition involves the ignition of continuous parallel lines of fire in 

a path directly into the wind, resulting in the majority of the fire being burnt 

by flank fires. The intensity of the overall fire can be increased by placing the 

lines of fire closer together since this increases the area subjected to 

junction zone fires. However, overall intensity is generally lower than that 

produced by strip head fire ignition but more intense than spot fire ignitions 

or backing fires. This method produces a relatively quick burn out of the 

area with relatively good control, although it can also lead to the formation of 

head fires which then allow the fire to escape control. A high level of skill is 

needed to use this method successfully. A variation of this technique may be 

used to burn out the vegetation on a spur. 192 

64 











RSCH.016.001.0307 


Centre fire ignition is only used in areas of heavy fuel, such as logging slash. 

It produces a high intensity fire with a strong convection column. 193 

Ring or perimeter fire ignition also produces a convection column and has a 

similar effect to centre fire ignition. It can be used where fuels are too low for 

centre fire ignition or where access is a problem but it is only successful 

where the effects of wind or slope are minimal. This method is also most 

applicable to relatively small areas. 194 

Area ignition is also used in areas of heavy fuel, such as logging slash, to 

remove the maximum amount of fuel possible. Its use is limited to flat terrain 

during light winds. Area ignition produces a particularly rapid burn and 

involves relatively less time and expense but has a high risk of escape. 195 







65

RSCH.016.001.0308 


Figure 2.11: Common ignition patterns used for prescribed 

burning. 196 

Note: small arrows show the direction of lighting. 

66 



RSCH.016.001.0309 


Ignition times 

The behaviour of a prescribed burn is also influenced by the time of day that 

it is ignited. The intensity and effects of a fire can be altered when ignition 

time is combined with ignition pattern and burn duration. 197 

Ignition of a prescribed burn early in the day produces a fire that starts 

slowly but which gradually builds as the fuels dry out through the day. As a 

result, the majority of the area is alight during the hottest and driest period of 

the day, increasing the difficulty of fire control and maximising the intensity 

of junction zones. The Synopsis notes that: 

A major cause of prescribed fires exceeding the desired intensity and causing 

suppression difficulties is that they are started under poor burning conditions early in 

the morning. Lighters usually place spots too close together in order to get them 

burning and then have difficulties as the fuels dry out and wind speeds increase 

during the day. 198 

The commencement of ignition around noon or early afternoon can delay 

the formation of junction zones until the late afternoon or evening, by which 

time the fire intensity has begun to decline so that canopy scorch is 

minimised. However, if ignition is delayed until late afternoon, the result can 

be unburnt patches which can reignite on subsequent days. 199 

Ignition in the late afternoon or early evening can achieve fires of 

comparatively low intensity under very dry conditions. However, this method 

is generally only successful during late Spring / early Summer or late 

Summer / early Autumn. Although the chance of an escape is minimised by 

this method, the area must be burnt out before the fire is extinguished by 

fuel moisture conditions. 200 

The Synopsis emphasises the following issue in relation to ignition times: 

A major problem with area prescribed burning is having areas of fire left within the 

burn when severe weather conditions are forecast on subsequent days. It is virtually 

impossible to contain the perimeter of fires inside the burn so all efforts must be 

made to burn the area out before the onset of severe weather by increasing the 

intensity of ignition, even if this means exceeding the prescribed intensity. 201 

Ignition tools 

Aerial ignition and ground ignition are the two main ignition methods. 

Ground ignition is generally used where the burn area is under 200 

hectares, where there is good access throughout the area and where the 











67

RSCH.016.001.0310 


costs of aircraft are not justified. A particular advantage of aerial ignition is 

its applicability where there is a narrow window of opportunity to burn within 

the prescriptions. The choice of an appropriate ignition tool is determined by 

the factors of fuel, weather, topography, human and financial resources and 

management objectives. 202 

The two primary aerial ignition devices in Victoria are the “Ping-Pong Ball” 

machine and the “Dragon”. 203 

The “Ping-Pong Ball” machine releases small plastic incendiary balls, 

usually from a helicopter, which ignite around the time they reach the 

ground. This method is used in difficult terrain, for burning large areas and is 

commonly used to conduct low intensity burns in forests. 204 

The “Dragon” is an aerial driptorch suspended beneath a helicopter, which is 

used to ignite and release controlled amounts of jellied petrol. Unlike the 

“Ping-Pong Ball” machine, this method is used where there is limited surface 

fine fuel but a large amount of elevated or coarse fuel – it allows the ignition 

of very intense fires. 205 

Ground ignition methods include: the hand-held driptorch, fusees (matches 

which are wind and water proof), and the vehicle-mounted flame-thrower. 

The choice of device will depend on the conditions and the objectives of the 

burn. 206 

The hand-held driptorch allows ignition points to be precisely located and for 

continuous changes to be made to the lighting pattern. However, it is “easy 

to use but difficult to use well”. 207 The Synopsis notes that: 

One temptation when using a driptorch is to light too many spot fires too close 

together or even to light continuous lines instead of spot fires. Experience and 

discipline are important attributes of a good operator. 208 

Fusees are used to achieve a specific pattern of spot fires where there is 

ample dry surface fine fuel. This method is less likely to result in areas being 

over-lit and provides the fire supervisor with greater control over the ignition 

68 















RSCH.016.001.0311 


pattern. However, fusees are less suitable where the surface fine fuels are 

patchy or have a relatively high moisture content. 209 

Vehicle-mounted flame-throwers are attached to the back of a vehicle which 

is driven along a control line or other form of ignition line. This method is 

useful where it is necessary to ignite a long perimeter burn and where the 

fuels are discontinuous (e.g. some heathlands, mallee shrublands and 

hummock grasslands). This method can be very effective and is relatively 

inexpensive. 210 

A further method of ground ignition is the hand-held incendiary launcher. 

However, the Synopsis notes that this method is used infrequently, for 

example where there is poor access within the burn area but ground ignition 

is required. 211 

Planning and conducting the burn 

As noted above, the Code requires the planning for prescribed burning 

operations to be “based on clearly stated objectives” and for each 

prescribed burn to have a primary objective of either: fuel reduction; 

silvicultural; or ecological management. 212 

The Prescribed Burning Manual identifies two main types of burn which are 

currently used to achieve these objectives: low-intensity prescribed burning 

(LIPB); and high-intensity prescribed burning (HIPB). 213 

Low-intensity prescribed burning (LIPB) is used to modify fuels that have 

generally resulted from natural accumulation. LIPB uses “spreading fires” to 

burn only a proportion of the fine fuel in the fuel profile and occasionally a 

very small proportion of the coarse fuels. 214 

High-intensity prescribed burning (HIPB) is used to modify generally large 

accumulations of vegetation debris (e.g. following clear-fell timber 

harvesting, land clearing, roadworks and wind-throw). The manual states 

that this involves burning large quantities of fine, coarse and even larger 

fuels at very high heat levels. HIPB fires are relatively confined in area but 

have a long burn-out time and usually produce strong convection and inflow 

winds, fire-whirls and large airborne firebrands. The manual notes that 

“[s]ome ecological burns, particularly where there is a high quantity of 








Land, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2006, p. 18. See also Department of 

Natural Resources and Environment, Code of Practice for Fire Management on Public Land, 

Department of Conservation and Natural Resource, Melbourne, 1995, p. 10. 





69

RSCH.016.001.0312 


elevated fuel, will also be of a relatively high intensity” but that whether 

these burns are of a low or high-intensity will depend on the ecological 

objectives. 215 

Each Burn Plan must state the primary objective of the burn and the Burn 

Prescription (the acceptable limits of factors such as temperature, fuel 

moisture content, wind speed, etc.) that will be used to achieve it. 216 

The Manual contains a table of standard prescriptions for prescribed burns, 

which is reproduced as Table 2.2 below. 217 These standard prescriptions are 

based on nine categories of vegetation (defined as “Burn Class”) and are 

applicable to all Fire Regions across the state. 218 The factors included in the 

standard prescriptions are as follows: 

• Fire Danger Index (FDI (max)): defined as a “relative number 

denoting an evaluation of rate of spread, or suppression difficulty for 

specific combinations of fuel, fuel moisture and wind speed”. 219 A 

Forest Fire Danger Index (FFDI), which includes the long and short 

term effects of drought, is generally used to calculate the fire danger 

index in forest areas. 220 

• Air temperature (Temperature ( ° C)): the air temperature measured in 

degrees Celsius. 

• Relative humidity (RH (%)): defined as the “amount of water vapour in 

a given volume of air, expressed as a percentage of the maximum 

amount of water vapour the air can hold at that temperature”. 221 

• Wind speed (Wind (km/h @ 10 metres in open): wind speed 

measured in kilometres per hour (wind direction is also taken into 

account). 

• Keetch – Byram Drought Index (KBDI): defined as “a numerical value 

reflecting the dryness of soils, deep forest litter, logs and living 

vegetation, and expressed as a scale from 0 – 200”. 222 

70 








Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 1. 









RSCH.016.001.0313 


• Fine fuel moisture content (FFMC (%)): defined as “the proportion of 

free and absorbed water in the fuel expressed as a percentage of its 

oven dry weight”. 223 

The revised version of the Prescribed burning Manual provides the following 

as examples of fuel reduction and ecological burn objectives, and the 

associated Burn Prescriptions, in a Burn Plan: 

Fuel Reduction Burn 

Burn Operation Objective: 

To produce a mosaic of burnt surface fuels on 50% of the Burn Area, while protecting 

timber regrowth in the burn area and adjacent wet gully vegetation. 

Burn Prescription: 

DRY SCLEROPHYLL FOREST (MATURE, WITHOUT WIREGRASS) - FDI

RSCH.016.001.0314 


Table 2.2: Standard prescribed burn prescriptions.227 

FDI (max) 

Dry sclerophyll forest 

(regrowth, without 

wiregrass) 

8 

Dry sclerophyll forest 10 

(mature, without wiregrass) Day 2

RSCH.016.001.0315 


The reporting process for prescribed burning 

The reporting process for prescribed burning is the subject of the Inquiry’s 

fourth term of reference. The reporting hierarchy within which the planning, 

conduct and post-burn assessment of prescribed burning by DSE and its 

partner agencies occurs has been outlined above. In this section, the 

Committee outlines the way in which the effectiveness of each prescribed 

burn is assessed and how the outcomes are reported. The Committee then 

considers the argument, which was made by a number of stakeholders, that 

there is a need for greater transparency in the reporting process. The 

section concludes with a discussion of the use of remote sensing imagery in 

Western Australia and the potential that exists for the greater use of this 

technology in Victoria’s prescribed burning program. 

Background 

Following the completion of a prescribed burn, the officer in charge of the 

burn (the “burn OIC”) must prepare a record of the burn outcomes, for entry 

in FireWeb. 228 The outcomes recorded, as shown in Figure 2.12 below, 

include the intensity of the burn and a map showing the areas which were 

burnt or unburnt. 



73

RSCH.016.001.0316 


Figure 2.12: Prescribed burn record. 229 

Prescribed Burn Operations Record 

[FireWeb] 

The following must be recorded in FireWeb for each prescribed burn by the end of May 

for Autumn burns and the end of December for Spring burns: 

• date of the burn; 

• Fire Danger Index; 

• weather conditions at appropriate times before and during the burn, including: 

‣ Drought Index (or equivalent) for the day; 

‣ air temperature; 

‣ relative humidity; 

‣ general wind direction and speed; 

• intensity class; 

• ignition pattern; 

• whether or not objectives were achieved. 

*Intensity class: 

Very High – means crowns removed 

High – means crowns scorched 

Medium – means understorey scorched 

Low – means surface (only) burn 

Defaults: 

‘Medium’ – Fuel Reduction Burn 

‘Very High’ – Regeneration Burn 

In addition to completing the Prescribed Burn Operations Record, the following 

documents must be produced and stored: 

• copy of the approved Burn Plan and maps; 

• list of resources, including personnel, used at the burn (this may be a printout 

from IRIS); 

• map of areas burnt and not burnt; 

• map showing the extent of any escapes beyond the planned control lines; 

• checklist of tasks completed on the day of the burn; 

• details of rehabilitation works undertaken; 

• an electronic record of the burn boundary to update fire history layers in the 

DSE Corporate Geospatial Data Library (CGDL). This should be forwarded to 

the Manager, Data Unit, Fire Information & Systems Group, Level 4, 8 

Nicholson Street, East Melbourne 3002. For information regarding data 

collection and formatting standards, refer to Guideline 4.1.1: Collection of Fire 

History Data in Fire Management Manual 4.1 Fuel Management (DNRE 

2002a). 

74 


Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2008, p. 6_1 to 6_2.

RSCH.016.001.0317 


The Prescribed Burn Operations Record enables the outcome of the burn to 

be reviewed according to the objectives of the Burn Plan. 230 Where 

objectives are not met, the Manual states that “corrective actions must be 

taken, and burns rescheduled in Fire Operations Plans if necessary”. 231 As 

noted below, the Committee received evidence from a number of 

stakeholders that burns are often not rescheduled following a failure to meet 

the objectives contained in a Burn Plan. 

The criteria used by DSE to assess the outcome of a fuel reduction burn are 

contained in Fire Protection Plans. For example, the Gippsland Fire 

Protection Plan provides the following in relation to Fuel Management Zones 

1, 2 and 3: 

Zone 1: Fuel management is to be intensive, i.e. to treat up to 90 % of each fire 

protection unit in each burning operation. 

Zone 2: Fuel management is to be strategic and regular and aims to maintain a 

nominated range of fuel characteristics that are generally broader than those for 

Zone 1, i.e. to treat up to 80 % of each fire protection unit in each burning operation. 

Zone 3: Fuel management aims to provide a mosaic of fire frequencies and 

intensities without large contiguous areas of non-managed fuel, complementing the 

intensive and strategic fuel management undertaken in Zones 1 and 2. Opportunistic 

burning may also occur in this zone to link areas burnt by wildfire to other strategic 

fuel management areas. It is aimed to treat approximately 50 % of each burning unit 

in any burning operation. 232 

The majority of post-burn assessments are currently conducted by means of 

a “walk-through” by personnel from DSE and partner agencies, although 

aerial and satellite observation may also be used in some cases. 233 As 

indicated in the example above, the aim of the assessment is to determine 

the proportion of the area within each “fire protection unit” or “burning unit” 

which has been burnt. 

The Mildura Fire Protection Plan, which as noted above, is the first such 

plan to have implemented the new four "Fire Management Zone" model, has 

also adopted new fuel reduction benchmarks for its zones. As with the 

current Fire Protection Plan for Gippsland, the new Mildura plan specifies 

that each “fuel treatment operation” should result in area treatments of 90 

and 80 per cent for zones one and two respectively. However, the Mildura 

plan also states that the object of each fuel treatment in zones one and two 

is to achieve an overall fuel hazard rating of “Low”. 234 The Committee notes 

that this introduces a specific requirement to conduct post-burn 

assessments in zones one and two by reference to overall fuel hazard 

ratings and therefore, to the level of risk reduction achieved. The Committee 


Burning, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2001, p. 6_1 to 6_2. 



232 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Fire Protection Plan - Gippsland Region, 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 1999. 


234 Department of Sustainability and Environment, North West Region - Mildura Fire District Fire 

Protection Plan Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2008, pp. 32, 34. 

75

RSCH.016.001.0318 


welcomes this additional level of detail in assessing the effectiveness of 

individual prescribed burns and is unaware of any reason why it should not 

be adopted in future plans for all Fire Districts. In relation to zone three, 

however, the Committee notes that the Mildura plan specifies neither a 

percentage for the area to be treated nor an overall fuel hazard rating 

benchmark. The Committee’s concerns regarding the new approach to zone 

three in the Mildura plan are discussed below. This issue is also addressed 

by Recommendation 2.1. 

The first stage in the reporting process, following the assessment of a 

prescribed burn, is the production of a weekly internal report by DSE, which 

details the net treated area within each zone in each Fire District. This 

reporting process forms the basis of the final statewide net treated area 

which is reported by DSE in its Annual Report. 

DSE also publishes information on the progress of its prescribed burning 

program throughout the year on its website, which includes details of 

planned burns, burns in progress and completed burns. 

Evidence received 

During a site visit to Cann River, the Committee met with a number of local 

residents who questioned the accuracy of DSE’s post-burn assessments. 

Residents claimed that the proportion of a planned burn area that is actually 

treated is often significantly lower than both the area specified prior to the 

burn and the area that is subsequently reported. The Committee also heard 

that burns were often not rescheduled following a failure to treat the 

specified proportion of a burn unit. 235 

Grampians Asset Protection also claimed that several planned burns in the 

vicinity of the Grampians National Park were reported as completed when 

they had in fact not been conducted. Grampians Asset Protection argued 

that this demonstrated a need for greater transparency in the reporting 

process: 

Some of the maps produced over the years have been very misleading, as they have 

shown burns allegedly completed, but in fact several of them either never took place 

or were attempted without success under unsuitable conditions. DSE must be 

accountable in terms of agreed burns actually being carried out…Objective 

assessments must be made after each attempted burn, indicating the proportion of 

the targeted area successfully burnt. This data must be fully and openly reported to 

all interested parties… 236 

A further problem with the assessment of individual prescribed burns was 

noted by Dr Kevin Tolhurst who argued that reporting the total area burnt 

does not provide an effective measure of the burn outcome. Dr Tolhurst 

argued that, at a minimum, burns should be assessed by reference to the 

76 

235 Cann River Residents, personal communication, 6 March 2008. 

236 Grampians Asset Protection, Submission, no. 167, 1 June 2007, p. 3.

RSCH.016.001.0319 


extent to which the desired fuel hazard level is achieved in each fire 

management zone. 237 

During a site visit to Western Australia, the Committee was informed by the 

Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation that 

remote sensing imagery ◊ , produced by “Landsat” (i.e. satellite), is now used 

in that state to map both the extent and intensity of prescribed burns. 238 An 

example is shown below at Figure 2.13. 

The Committee notes that the adoption of a similar approach to post-burn 

assessment by DSE, and the publication of the images obtained, may 

effectively address the stakeholder concerns noted above. 

Moreover, the level of post-burn detail possible in such images may also 

address the concern noted by Dr Tolhurst. The use of a similar indicator to 

the percentage “biomass change after fire” (shown in Figure 2.13) could 

provide a more precise indication of the extent to which a prescribed burn 

had reduced the fuel hazard to desired levels. A post-burn image of this kind 

could be assessed against a map of the same area showing the pre-burn 

fuel hazard levels, as measured and recorded using the Overall Fuel Hazard 

Guide (outlined above). 

The Committee notes that the use of Landsat imagery may be more difficult 

in Victoria’s steep and divided terrain than in Western Australia and that the 

technology has previously not been cost effective. 239 However, DSE has 

informed the Committee that there is likely to be an increasing use of such 

satellite imagery in the future as part of the shift to landscape-scale 

prescribed burning. 240 

237 Dr. K. Tolhurst, Submission, no. 137, 28 May 2007, p. 4. 

◊ Remote sensing refers to the observation of the Earth’s surface using aerial photography and 

satellites. See: Geoscience Australia, 'About Remote Sensing', viewed 16 April 2008, 

. 

238 Department of Environment and Conservation (WA), Fire Management Services, Briefing, Perth, 

17 March 2008.; Geoscience Australia, 'About Remote Sensing', viewed 16 April 2008, 

. 

239 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, p. 13. 



77

RSCH.016.001.0320 


Figure 2.13: Landsat image of a prescribed burn in Western 

Australia. 241 

Conclusion 

The Committee welcomes DSE’s statement that it anticipates and increase 

in the use of remote sensing imagery as a means of better assessing the 

outcomes of individual prescribed burns and the effectiveness of the 

prescribed burning program. 242 The Committee considers that greater use of 

remote sensing imagery is likely to significantly increase the capacity of both 

DSE and the public to determine whether the objectives of a burn have been 

met and whether there is a need for corrective action such as a follow-up 

burn. Remote sensing technology has the potential to significantly improve 

the transparency of the prescribed burning assessment and reporting 

process. 

78 

241 Department of Environment and Conservation (WA), Fire Management Services, Briefing, Perth, 

17 March 2008. 


Melbourne, 7 April 2008.

RSCH.016.001.0321 


Recommendation 2.1: 

That the Department of Sustainability and Environment implement remote 

sensing imagery as a routine part of its pre-burn and post-burn assessment 

process for prescribed burning. Maps of every prescribed burn should be 

produced in a similar format to those used in Western Australia, indicating 

the boundary of each burn and the varying fire intensities achieved within the 

burn area. The boundaries of all Fuel Management Zones within each burn 

should also be indicated. 

Each prescribed burn map should be made publicly available on the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment’s website, together with a map 

of the same burn area which shows the pre-burn fuel hazard levels and a 

statement of the total area treated within each Fuel Management Zone by 

each prescribed burn. 

The effectiveness of fuel reduction burning 

There is a general consensus within the Australian and international 

literature that fuel reduction burning does contribute to bushfire suppression. 

This finding was expressed in the Esplin Report in the following terms: 

Prescribed burning, for whatever purpose, will reduce the amount of fuel present. If 

the amount of fuel is less, then the potential heat released in a fire from the remnant 

fuel is less. If this heat is less, then the chance of controlling any unplanned fire is 

greater. If the chance of fire control is greater, then the chance of loss of human life 

and property is smaller. 243 

In summary, fire intensity, which is a critical factor in bushfire suppression, 

can be reduced by fuel reduction burning. Moreover, as numerous studies 

have noted, while the fuel load is one of a number of variables that affect fire 

intensity, it is the only one that can be modified by human intervention. 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE also emphasised the overall 

effectiveness of prescribed burning: 

The evidence is that prescribed burning has been of significant assistance in fire 

suppression operations on public land. Fuel reduction burning has assisted directly in 

the protection of high-value assets, including townships, and it has played a role in 

helping firefighters reduce the area burnt by large and severe wildfires. 244 

DSE cited evidence that the effects of fuel reduction burning may persist for 

up to 10 to 15 years, while noting that the effects are most significant during 

the first three to five years. This is explained by the fact that although 

surface fuels may recover within the first three to five years, the reduction in 

bark and elevated fuels have longer term effects, such as a decline in the 

potential for spotting and the formation of crown fires. 245 





79

RSCH.016.001.0322 


Meredith (1994) has found that prescribed burning is likely to assist 

suppression efforts for longer than three years for fires that occur on less 

severe days. However, he suggested that fires occurring under severe 

conditions may be the more appropriate ‘yardstick’ given that such fires 

‘cause by far the most loss of life and property, as well as environmental 

damage.’ 246 

DSE also referred the Committee to case studies which suggest that the 

effectiveness of a given burn is influenced by the proportion of the area 

burnt within its boundaries, noting that in strategic burning corridors (not to 

be confused with the fuel management zones outlined above) a minimum of 

50 per cent, and perhaps up to 60 to 80 per cent, of an area may need to be 

burnt for it to be effectively treated. 247 

In a supplementary submission to the inquiry, DSE provided recent 

examples of fuel reduction burns which had contributed to the suppression 

of bushfires across the state. 248 

Recent confirmation of the effectiveness of fuel reduction burning has also 

been provided by Project Vesta, a study conducted by the Bushfire CRC 

and the Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation. 

The study found that fuel reduction burning produced reductions in the rate 

of spread, flame height and intensity of fires. 249 The study also found that 

prescribed burning reduces the number and distance of spot fires by altering 

the fuel bed structure and reducing the fuel load – effects which may persist 

for up to 20 years in forests that contain rough-barked trees and shrubby 

under-storey. 250 

DSE referred the Committee to recent research from the USA which 

suggests a link between the placement of fuel reduced areas in space and 

time and the overall effectiveness of a fuel reduction program. 251 DSE 

concluded that applying the principles of this work to Australia would 

translate to the treatment of around two to five per cent of the landscape in 

strategic locations each year to ensure an impact in a large fire situation. 252 

DSE also concluded that the same research suggested that for randomly 

positioned treatments, around four to ten per cent of the landscape would 

need to be treated each year to have the same effect. 253 

80 

246 C. Meredith, 'Biodiversity Series, Paper No. 8', Paper presented at the Fire and biodiversity: the 

effects and effectiveness of fire management, Footscray, Melbourne, 1994. 


248 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168C, 31 August 2007, pp. 1-4.; 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168D, 9 January 2008, p. 1. 

249 Bushfire CRC, 'New Guidelines for Predicting Fire Behaviour', viewed 19 June 2008, 

. 

250 Bushfire CRC, 'New Guidelines for Predicting Fire Behaviour', viewed 19 June 2008, 

. 



253 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, p. 4.

RSCH.016.001.0323 


Stakeholders also provided the Committee with a range of views regarding 

the appropriate extent of prescribed burning on public land in Victoria. East 

Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce Inc. suggested that, after deducting rainforest 

and timber harvesting areas, 20 per cent of the forested areas east of the 

Snowy River in Gippsland should be fuel reduced each year. 254 Forest Fire 

Victoria Inc. nominated an annual statewide target of 460,000 hectares 

(almost six per cent of the public land estate). 255 David Packham, a member 

of Forest Fire Victoria Inc., suggested a minimum annual statewide target of 

approximately 600,000 hectares (nearly eight per cent of the public land 

estate). 256 The issue of the appropriate extent of prescribed burning on 

public land is discussed in further detail later in the chapter. 

The influence of fuel management zones 

While the principle of fuel reduction burning as a bushfire mitigation tool is 

well established, its effectiveness is influenced by the extent to which fuels 

are reduced in a given area. One aspect of this is the “management 

intensity” that is applied to a particular area, which refers to the proportion of 

each fire protection unit that is treated by a burning operation (e.g. 90 per 

cent in zone one; 80 per cent in zone two; and 50 per cent in zone three). A 

further aspect is the level to which fuels are reduced within the treated 

proportion of each fire protection unit. 

A study conducted by McCarthy and Tolhurst (2001) assessed the 

effectiveness of broadscale fuel reduction burning during the preceding two 

decades with a focus on the location of fuel management zones. The study 

concluded that fuel reduction burning in zones one and two did contribute to 

bushfire suppression but that burning in zone three had only a “random 

chance” of contributing to bushfire suppression. 257 The Committee notes, 

however, that the finding in relation to zone three is likely a reflection of the 

approach to prescribed burning in this zone over past decades. That is, a 

predominantly random placement of burn units – rather than the emerging 

approach of strategically placed burns – and an insufficient level of 

prescribed burning within the zone. 

Rawson, Billing and Rees (1985) have noted that large fuel-reduced areas, 

such as those in zone three, have frequently assisted in bushfire 

suppression. Moreover, the authors concluded that although such burns had 

sometimes had a minimal effect on spread rates under extreme conditions, 

this simply demonstrated the need for treatments which achieve greater 

reductions in fuel quantity: 

254 East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce, Submission, no. 63, 18 May 2007, p. 2. 

255 A. Hodgson, Forest Fire Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 27 August 2007. 

256 D. Packham, Submission, no. 154B, 1 July 2007, p. 2. 

257 Dr. K. Tolhurst, 'Prescribed Burning in Victoria: Policy and Practice', Paper presented at the 

Bushfire Prevention: Are We Doing Enough? Conference, Institute of Public Affairs, 2003, p. 10. 

81

RSCH.016.001.0324 


The most dramatic examples of the impact of fuel-reduction burning can be found 

where fires have spread to barriers created by intensive burning [e.g. zones one and 

two]. Such burns, usually of relatively small area, have played a vital role in 

settlement protection in particular. 

Large fuel-reduced areas [e.g. zone three] have also provided substantial assistance 

during fire control operations although, because the total fuel quantities left are 

usually greater than after a small-scale operation, their effectiveness is more closely 

linked with fire intensity. They have frequently helped to minimise the spread of 

lightning-caused fires and therefore assist fire control in often difficult and remote 

terrain. However, under conditions of very high to extreme fire danger, where a fire 

has entered on a broad front, such areas have sometimes had little impact on spread 

rates. Because it is clear that the present standard of fuel-reduction is not always 

adequate, operational techniques which achieve greater reductions in fuel quantity 

need to be implemented. 258 

DSE’s evidence to the Inquiry suggests a change of approach in the areas 

in which much of the shift towards landscape-scale prescribed burning 

would need to occur; that is, zone three (under both the 1995 Code and 

under the revised Code). Although zone three has been renamed under the 

revised Code as the “Ecological Management Zone”, fire protection benefits 

remain a requirement for this zone. The strategy for achieving such benefits 

in Fire Protection Plans produced under the 1995 Code was broadly the 

same as for zones one and two; that is, to treat a defined percentage of 

each burning unit (e.g. 50 percent under the Gippsland Fire Protection 

Plan). However, the new approach to burning in zone three apparently 

acknowledges that such targets may not be appropriate, either ecologically 

or from a fire protection perspective. 259 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE provided the following generic example 

of a possible prescribed burning regime for zone three: 

…the fire management objectives in Ecological Zones could be achieved by burning 

drier north and westerly aspects (say 20-40% of the burn area) for several rotations 

(i.e. where more naturally fire prone vegetation types occur) – followed by less 

frequent burning of wetter easterly and southern aspects. 260 

A specific example of the new approach to prescribed burning in zone three 

is provided by the Fire Protection Plan for Mildura, which as noted above, is 

the first plan to adopt the four Fire Management Zone model under the 

revised Code. 261 The plan does not specify a target percentage for the area 

to be treated within zone three for each burn unit but instead provides that 

prescribed burning intensity, frequency, seasonality and patchiness should 

be determined by applicable fire ecology strategies or, where these do not 

yet exist, by reference to Appendix 2 of the plan. Appendix 2 sets out 

environmental principles for Mallee public land and preferred fire regimes for 

82 

258 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Effectiveness of Fuel Reduction Burning (10 Case 

Studies)', viewed 6 April 2008, . 




RSCH.016.001.0325 


various Mallee vegetation types, based on maximum and minimum tolerable 

fire intervals for a number of Ecological Vegetation Divisions. 262 

On the one hand, the Committee notes that the shift away from area 

treatment targets within zone three may provide DSE with the flexibility 

needed to increase the level of prescribed burning, and to achieve more 

strategically placed mosaics of burnt and unburnt vegetation, across the 

landscape. On the other hand, the Committee is concerned that the removal 

of area treatment targets for zone three may reduce the accountability and 

transparency of prescribed burning operations within the zone. For these 

reasons, the Committee considers it is particularly important that DSE 

include a statement of the total area treated within each Fuel Management 

Zone as part of its reporting process for each prescribed burn, as 

recommended earlier in this chapter; that is, Recommendation 2.1. 

Measuring the effectiveness of fuel reduction and ecological 

burning 

The Esplin Report noted that there is currently no “unequivocal and 

immediate choice of an appropriate measure for the effectiveness of 

prescribed burning”. 263 In other words, there is currently significant 

uncertainty regarding how the effectiveness of prescribed burning may be 

quantified. The report devoted an entire chapter (Chapter 11) to this issue 

and outlined thirteen possible approaches to measuring the effectiveness of 

prescribed burning. While the Committee considers that efforts to quantify 

the effectiveness of fuel reduction burning in mitigating the scale and 

intensity of bushfires is important, it also acknowledges that this is likely to 

remain an area of ongoing research for some time. 

The 2003 Victorian Auditor-General’s report recommended that DSE 

supplement the use of “area targets” as a measure of fuel reduction burning 

with “measures that more accurately reflect the level of risk reduction being 

sought and achieved” and that it report on the results obtained. 264 

The Committee considers that there are two important aspects to measuring 

the effectiveness of prescribed burning: cost effectiveness; and improved 

mapping. These issues are discussed further below. 

A number of stakeholders argued that prescribed burning in Victoria is 

actually increasing the vulnerability of the bush to wildfires. 265 The 

Committee notes that inappropriate fire regimes have been acknowledged 

262 Department of Sustainability and Environment, North West Region - Mildura Fire District Fire 

Protection Plan Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2008, pp. 36, 59. The plan notes that 

the fifty Ecological Vegetation Classes identified on public land in the Mildura Fire District have been 

grouped into fourteen Ecological Vegetation Divisions “based on their general ecological similarities 

and their consistent fire regime responses. 



264 Auditor General Victoria, Fire Prevention and Preparedness, Auditor General Victoria, Melbourne, 

2003, p. 6. 

265 R. Weatherly, Submission, no. 118, 25 May 2007, p. 2. 

83

RSCH.016.001.0326 


as having the potential to produce such an outcome i.e. by promoting fire 

tolerant plant species. However, the Committee also notes that the 

continuing process of integrating the ecological research findings of DSE, 

Parks Victoria and the Bushfire CRC within planned fire regimes will reduce 

the likelihood of inappropriate planned fire regimes. 

Environmental factors 

A major reason for the controversy surrounding the appropriate extent of 

prescribed burning on public land is the level of concern within the 

community about its environmental impacts. A number of stakeholders 

expressed concerns that current levels and methods of prescribed burning 

on public land are harmful to the environment. 266 

However, the Victorian Fire Ecology Working Group (a partnership between 

DSE and Parks Victoria) has found that biodiversity in Victoria is in fact 

threatened by the infrequency of current fire regimes: 

Inappropriate fire regimes (and in particular too-frequent fire) is commonly regarded 

as a significant threat to biodiversity in Victoria and indeed, high frequency fire has 

recently been nominated as a threatening process under the Flora and Fauna 

Guarantee Act (1988). The results from this analysis indicate, however, that overburning 

is not occurring at either a Statewide or at any bioregional scale. These 

results suggest that the threat which fire frequency poses to species composition and 

community conservation in Victoria is in fact from under-exposure to fire; i.e. fire 

frequency is too low across the landscape. 267 

The challenge of returning fire to the landscape in a way that is consistent 

with environmental needs has been expressed by David Lindenmayer, 

Professor of Ecology and Conservation Science at the Fenner School for 

Environment and Society at the Australian National University, in the 


Most natural fires are very patchy, they leave a very patchy environment and that's 

critical to the recovery of biodiversity and the environment after fire. The big 

difference with…back-burning and human fires is that they tend to be very uniform 

and that creates a very homogeneous environment which is not so good for many 

species to recover, or recover very quickly from. 268 

DSE’s stated approach to solving this problem has been to emphasise the 

importance of using planned fire in a way that mimics the natural fire 

regime. 269 DSE has adopted a scientific framework to achieve this which is 

84 

266 See for example: Wombat Forest Care, Submission, no. 186, 4 June 2007; Otway Conservation 

Council, Submission, no. 197, 6 June 2007; Goongerah Environment Centre, Submission, no. 195, 5 

June 2007; Environment East Gippsland Inc., Submission, no. 225, 4 June 2007; M. Killeen, 

Submission, no. 235, 1 August 2007; C. Copley, Submission, no. 244, 18 September 2007; J. 

Whadcoat, Submission, no. 246, 29 August 2007; P. Crisp, Submission, no. 248, 11 September 2007. 

267 Department of Natural Resources and Environment and P. Victoria, Analysis of Disturbance of Fire 

on Public Land in Victoria: Fire Ecology Working Group, Department of Sustainability and 

Environment, Melbourne, 2002, p. VIII. 

268 Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 'Firestorm', viewed 18 April 2008, 

. 

269 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Gippsland Burning News: Autumn 2008, 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2008, p. 3.

RSCH.016.001.0327 


set out in the Guidelines and procedures for ecological burning on public 

land in Victoria (2004) (“the Guidelines”). The Guidelines are not prescriptive 

but instead contain a number of “general principles which may be used as a 

guide to action or decision-making”. 270 

The approach outlined in the Guidelines involves using the “vital attributes” 

(also referred to as “life history”) of key plant species to determine the upper 

and lower tolerable fire intervals for an ecologically appropriate fire 

management regime. Plant species are categorized according to their 

Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC), of which there are approximately 300 

across the state and which are defined as: 

…one or a number of floristic communities that appear to be associated with a 

recognisable environmental niche, and which can be characterised by a number of 

their adaptive responses to ecological processes that operate at the landscape scale 

level. 271 

In the case of ecological burns (i.e. burns with a primary purpose of one or 

more conservation or related outcomes), the vital attributes approach is 

implemented through the use of an “Ecological Burn Plan” which is 

completed prior to the burn. 272 

In the case of each Fire District, and therefore presumably for the majority of 

broad area burns in zone three, the “vital attributes” approach is to be 

implemented through an Ecological Fire Strategy (since renamed a “Fire 

Ecology Strategy”). 273 At the time of writing, DSE had yet to finalise its Fire 

Ecology Strategies, although the Committee was advised that a number had 

been completed to draft stage. 274 

The Committee understands that the delay in the completion of Fire Ecology 

Strategies may be due in part to gaps in data collection and in the mapping 

of EVCs for particular areas. DSE has advised the Committee that the 

implementation of Fire Ecology Strategies requires “substantial work” and 

may take a further three to five years. 275 The Committee has also been 

advised, however, that a number of Fire Ecology Strategies are now in draft 

form and are already having an impact on the planning process for 

prescribed burning. 276 The Committee also notes that DSE has adopted an 

approach of “adaptive management” to its prescribed burning program to 

facilitate changes to burning practices in accordance with future research 

findings. 

270 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Guidelines and procedures for ecological burning 

on public land in Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2004, pp. 4-10. 

271 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Ecological Vegetation Class (EVC) Benchmarks 

for each Bioregion', viewed 6 April 2008, . 


on public land in Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2004, p. 15. 


on public land in Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2004, p. 21.; 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Code of Practice for Fire Management on Public Land, 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2006, p. 10. 

274 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 15 January 2008. 


276 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 15 January 2008. 

85

RSCH.016.001.0328 


A limitation of the “vital attributes” approach on which draft Fire Ecology 

Strategies are based is that it does not currently account for the effects of 

planned fire regimes on fauna. 277 The Committee notes, however, that this 

issue is likely to be the subject of future research. 

The Esplin Report cited a figure of around 3.3 per cent as the proportion of 

public land in Victoria that should be burnt each year for ecological 

purposes. This figure was based on research conducted by DSE’s Fire 

Ecology Working Group, which found that the ideal average interval 

between fires for Victorian forests is about 30 years. 278 Since it is based on 

an ideal average fire interval for all Victorian forests, this figure apparently 

accounts for the fact that a proportion of the public land estate is unsuitable 

for prescribed burning. As noted in the introduction to this chapter, 

approximately 6.2 million hectares of the total 7.7 million hectares of the 

public land estate is suited to prescribed burning. 

It is important to note that the figure of 3.3 per cent was based on an 

estimate of the average fire interval for the whole landscape. In many areas, 

the actual interval between successive fuel reduction/ecological burns is 

significantly shorter; in some areas it is longer; and in some areas fire is 

excluded altogether. As the Committee discusses below, the average figure 

may provide a broad indication of the minimum level of ecological burning 

required on public land in Victoria, albeit one which may be superseded by 

future research. 

Finding 2.2: 

The Committee finds that the frequency and extent of prescribed burning has 

been insufficient, over a number of decades, for the preservation of 

ecological processes and biodiversity across the public land estate. An 

increase in the extent and frequency of prescribed burning for the 

enhancement of environmental values should therefore be a priority for the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner agencies. 

Water quality and quantity 

The Inquiry’s third term of reference requires the Committee to consider the 

impact of prescribed burning on water quality and quantity. A reliable and 

high-quality water supply is of crucial importance for Victoria’s homes, 

farms, industry and environment. Moreover, the Government has recognised 

that successive years of low rainfall, population growth, degrading river 

systems, and the anticipated effects of climate change, all highlight the need 

for “new and better ways to secure water for the future”. 279 The negative 

impact on water quality and quantity resulting from recent bushfires, and the 

86 





279 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Our Water Our Future: Securing Our Water Future 

Together', viewed 18 April 2008, .

RSCH.016.001.0329 


threat posed by future bushfires, must be added to this list of challenges to 

Victoria’s water supply. In this section, the Committee considers the 

potential for prescribed burning to mitigate the impacts of bushfires in water 

catchments through the establishment of appropriate fire regimes. 

DSE advised the Committee that a further reason for an increase in 

prescribed burning is the need to reduce the risks posed by bushfires in and 

around water catchments. 280 DSE referred to the impact of the 2006/07 fires 

on a number of high value water catchments, historic research in 

Melbourne’s water catchments and the Australian Capital Territory fires of 

2003 as case studies of the impacts of bushfires on catchments. 281 

In relation to water yield, DSE cited research conducted since the 1950s in 

Melbourne’s catchment areas which found that there is a significant decline 

in water runoff and yields following the regeneration of Mountain Ash forests 

in areas damaged by bushfires. Water yield gradually declines between 10 

to 30 years after the fire event and by 25 to 30 years the decline can be as 

much as 50 per cent. Full recovery to pre-fire water yields can take up to 

150 years. Based on a scenario of 100 per cent damage to Melbourne’s 

catchments, a predicted 30 per cent decline in yield between 10 to 30 years 

later would represent an overall cost of $520 million per year, or $16 billion 

over the whole period. 282 

In relation to water quality, DSE referred to the example of the Australian 

Capital Territory fires which severely affected Canberra’s water catchment. 

The subsequent decline in water quality resulted in the need for the rapid 

construction of a water treatment plant. DSE noted that if Melbourne’s 

catchments were to be similarly affected by bushfires, the estimated cost of 

fully treating the city’s water would be $2 billion plus running costs. 283 

Grampians Wimmera Mallee Water (GWM Water) identified similar problems 

to those experienced in the ACT. The impact of the 2006 Grampians fires on 

water quality in the area required GWM Water to shut off the water supply to 

Stawell for several days to a week after each moderate rain event. 284 This 

continued for approximately 12 months after the fire event. As part of the 

bushfire recovery process, GWM Water also initiated erosion protection 

works (rock constructed weirs), a review of water treatment processes and 

increased water quality sampling. 285 





284 GWM Water, Submission, no. 224, 3 July 2007, p. 2. 

285 GWM Water, Submission, no. 224, 3 July 2007, p. 3. 

87

RSCH.016.001.0330 


Wellington Shire, in Gippsland, summarised the impact of the recent fires in 

the following terms: 

Severe erosion has already caused destructive mud slides in the township of Licola 

and increased the turbidity of local rivers, especially the Dargo, Barkly, Wonnangatta, 

Macalister and Mitchell. Contamination of these rivers by ash, soil and debris had 

rendered some town supplies undrinkable and complicated the treatment of water as 

far downstream as Bairnsdale, with contaminated water also entering Cowwarr Weir 

Lake Glenmaggie and the Gippsland Lakes. 286 

East Gippsland Water (EGW) has noted that it may take a number of years 

for its river catchments to fully regenerate, and for water quality to be 

restored, following the bushfires of 2006/07. EGW estimated the cost of 

dealing with the immediate problem of increased sediment loads following 

significant rain in early 2007 alone, at approximately $6 million. 287 

EGW also reported that the 2006/07 bushfires had a particularly severe 

effect on the Mitchell River catchment. The catchment provides drinking 

water to over 17,000 people in a number of areas including, Bairnsdale, 

Metung, Paynesville, Bruthen, Nicholson, Lakes Entrance and Lake 

Tyers. 288 The deterioration in the catchment’s water quality required the 

installation of significant infrastructure, including, water clarifiers, water 

settlement dams, emergency water bores, an extensive pipeline network, 

and diesel generators for electricity generation. 289 

The High Country Councils Coalition informed the Committee that turbidity in 

the Mitchell River following the 2006/07 fires had necessitated severe water 

restrictions. The Coalition also stated that it had been advised by the local 

water authority that: 

….. it has incurred considerable costs in terms of providing that immediate response 

with regard to water treatment, and is likely to require a further $15 million for an 

additional reservoir and water treatment plant in the short to medium-term. It is a 

considerable cost associated with water treatment. We are advised that the situation 

is likely to remain for several years in terms of the turbidity of the water and the issue 

of the need for water treatment for human consumption. 290 

The importance of prescribed burning for catchment protection has been 

recognised by Victoria’s Catchment Management Authorities, which provide 

input into DSE’s prescribed burning program each year. For example, the 

North East Catchment Management Authority advised the Committee that it 

is formally invited by DSE to provide input into the annual development of 

Fire Operations Plans. 291 This input is in addition to the Authority’s 

88 

286 Wellington Shire Council, Submission, no. 79, 23 May 2007, p. 3. 

287 East Gippsland Water Authority, Annual Report 2006-2007, State of Victoria, Victoria, 2007, p. 2. 



290 S. Kozlowski, Chief Executive Officer, East Gippsland Shire Council, High Country Council 

Coalition, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007. 

291 North East Catchment Management Authority, Submission, no. 27, 4 May 2007, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0331 


participation in community forums held in a number of locations and its 

examination of Draft Plans. 292 

An increase in prescribed burning on public land within water supply 

catchments was specifically endorsed by the East Gippsland Catchment 

Management Authority. The Authority informed the Committee that the 

recent fires of 2003 and 2007 had burnt extensive areas of the East 

Gippsland catchments and predicted that the impacts would persist for many 

years. The Authority also highlighted the fact that the area contains the 

majority of the Heritage Rivers in Victoria and referred the Committee to the 

East Gippsland Regional Catchment Strategy (RCS) which has been 

endorsed by a number of Victorian Government and former Commonwealth 

Government ministers, and which strongly supports an increase in 

prescribed burning on public land in the area. 293 

A 2004 report by the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) identified a 

need for further research and monitoring to fully understand the effects of 

prescribed burning, and large-scale bushfires, in catchment areas. 294 

However, the report also noted that a number of catchment management 

agencies in Australia were investigating the use of prescribed burning in 

water catchments as a means of “reducing the likelihood and magnitude of 

large bushfires”. 295 The Committee also notes the comments of Dr. Dick 

Williams, Sustainable Ecosystems, CSIRO, who explained the differing 

impact of wildfires and prescribed burning on water in the following terms: 

Water values may be affected substantially by wildfires, with the effects potentially 

lasting for decades, but are generally relatively little affected by prescribed burning, 

with exceptions being on sites where there are highly erodible soils. 296 

The Committee acknowledges the importance of further research in this 

area but considers that there is sufficient certainty regarding the likely 

benefits of prescribed burning in Victoria’s catchments. The Committee is 

particularly mindful of the significant financial and environmental impacts 

that recent bushfires have had on Victoria’s catchments. Moreover, the 

possibility of future bushfires of a similar scale and intensity represents a 

clear risk to the quantity and quality of Victoria’s water supplies and to the 

ecosystems dependent on them. The Committee concludes that these risks 

provide a further justification for an increase in the extent of prescribed 

burning on public land, both in and around catchment areas. 

292 North East Catchment Management Authority, Submission, no. 27, 4 May 2007, p. 1. 

293 East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, Submission, no. 165, 30 May 2007, pp. 3-4. 

294 S. Ellis, P. Kanowski and R. Whelan, National Inquiry on Bushfire Mitigation and Management, 

Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2004, pp. 116-117. 

295 S. Ellis, P. Kanowski and R. Whelan, National Inquiry on Bushfire Mitigation and Management, 

Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2004, p. 117. 

296 Dr. D. Williams, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 27 August 

2007. 

89

RSCH.016.001.0332 


Finding 2.3: 

The Committee finds that there is a need for an increase in the extent and 

frequency of prescribed burning in catchment areas to mitigate the risks 

associated with future bushfires. 

The extent of prescribed burning on public 

land 

As noted in the introduction to this chapter, the majority of stakeholders who 

provided evidence to the Committee called for a significant increase in the 

level of fuel reduction and ecological burning. 

In the preceding sections, the Committee has outlined the two main factors 

which are relevant to determining the appropriate extent of prescribed 

burning on public land: 

• the level of burning required to reduce the risk of frequent, large and 

potentially uncontrollable bushfires; and 

• the level of burning which is consistent with the preservation of 

environmental values, including biodiversity. 

In this section, the Committee draws on its findings in relation to the above 

issues to discuss an appropriate minimum level of fuel reduction and 

ecological burning on public land in Victoria. 

The Committee begins this section with an outline of the historical and 

current extent of fuel reduction and ecological burning. 

The historical extent of prescribed burning 

A number of stakeholders referred the Committee to evidence of a 

significant decline in the level of fuel reduction burning in recent years. Data 

compiled by Tolhurst provides some support for this conclusion. 297 Tolhurst 

found evidence of a decline in the extent of prescribed burning from an 

annual average of around 200,000 hectares during the 1980s to around 

110,000 hectares during the last two decades. 298 Tolhurst noted, however, 

that the actual annual area burnt during the 1980s varied dramatically, with 

almost 500,000 hectares burnt during 1981 compared to around 34,000 

hectares in 1989, and suggested that the fluctuation may have been largely 

90 




Bushfire Prevention: Are We Doing Enough? Conference, Institute of Public Affairs, 2003, p. 4.

RSCH.016.001.0333 


due to the number of suitable burning days in a given year and the size of 

individual burn areas. 299 

The Esplin report noted an apparent further decline in the annual area 

treated during the 1990s. 300 This is supported by data provided by DSE 

which shows that the annual average area treated during the last ten years 

has been around 78,000 hectares. 301 

The Committee notes that the apparent decline in the extent of prescribed 

burning may be due, at least in part, to changes in the way that the extent of 

a burn is measured. DSE advised the Committee that the current method of 

assessing the “treated” or “net” area burnt differs from that used in previous 

decades where “large continuous areas within the burn boundary that were 

not ignited or did not burn” may have been included. 302 In other words, part 

of the apparent decline in the extent of prescribed burning may be due to 

more accurate measurement. This point has also been noted by Tolhurst. 303 

The current extent of prescribed burning 

While a determination of the true extent of the decline in prescribed burning 

since the 1980s may not be possible, the question of greatest concern to the 

Committee is whether the current extent of prescribed burning, particularly 

across public land, is appropriate for both fire protection and environmental 

purposes. 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE noted that the annual program has 

recently been increased from 100,000 to 130,000 hectares, with a total net 

area of 138,490 hectares treated during 2006/07. 304 Around half of this area 

was in State forest managed by DSE with the other half (more than 67,000 

hectares) located within the Parks Victoria estate. 305 The Committee notes 

that the current annual target of 130,000 hectares represents approximately 

1.7 per cent of the 7.7 million hectares of public land. 

The required extent of prescribed burning 

Determining the appropriate extent of fuel reduction and ecological burning 

on public land is a complex issue and one which is unlikely to be finally 

resolved by the current Inquiry. Moreover, the Committee recognises that 

any conclusions it makes on this issue will be subject to the findings of 

future research. Nevertheless, the Committee considers that there is 









304 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Annual Report 2006-07, Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007, p. 159. 

305 Parks Victoria, Annual Report 2006-2007, Parks Victoria, Melbourne, 2007, p. 6. 

91

RSCH.016.001.0334 


sufficient evidence currently available to recommend the minimum annual 

average extent of prescribed burning required on public land. 

As noted above, recent studies suggest that between two to five per cent of 

the landscape would need to be treated in strategic locations each year for 

prescribed burning to be effective as a bushfire suppression strategy. The 

same studies also suggest that for randomly positioned treatments, four to 

ten per cent of the landscape would need to be treated each year to have 

the same effect. Research cited in the Esplin Report suggested that around 

3.3 per cent of the landscape would need to be treated each year to provide 

for the persistence of native vascular flora. It is therefore clear that the 

current level of prescribed burning is significantly lower than is required for 

both bushfire protection and ecological purposes. In the Committee’s view, a 

minimum average of five per cent of the public land estate should be treated 

by prescribed burning each year. This would represent an annual target of 

385,000 hectares, which is almost three times the current figure. The 

Committee believes that such a target strikes an appropriate balance 

between the ecological needs of the public land estate and the imperative of 

bushfire mitigation for the protection of communities. 

During the Committee’s final public hearing, DSE announced plans to 

significantly increase the level of fuel reduction and ecological burning. DSE 

referred to the planned adoption of increased landscape scale burning 

across “multiple kilometres-wide” areas. 306 The new approach was 

described as involving a focus on particular regions in a given year, during 

which a two to three month presence would be maintained by DSE and its 

partner agencies. In some cases, this would involve maintaining a fire in the 

region for much of that period and, if necessary, repeated efforts to 

overcome the vagaries of the weather. DSE also announced its intention to 

move away from reporting the total hectares treated each year as the sole 

measure of its prescribed burning program, towards the increased use of 

“multiple measures”. One such measure cited by DSE was the percentage 

of the area treated within each kilometre-wide burning area (e.g. whether 50, 

70 or 80 per cent of such an area was treated). 307 

Prescribed burning in Western Australia 

The south west forest regions of Western Australia cover an area of 

approximately 2.5 million hectares, consisting of Jarrah, Karri, and Marri 

trees. The broadly similar geographic and climatic conditions between 

south-west Western Australia and Eastern Victoria are often cited as 

providing a basis for comparison between the approaches to prescribed 

burning adopted by the two states. 

92 




Melbourne, 7 April 2008.

RSCH.016.001.0335 


Conclusion 

The level of prescribed burning undertaken in south-west Western Australia 

is significantly higher than the current level in Victoria, with a nominal 

200,000 hectare (eight per cent) target applying across the region. 308 While 

in the 1960s and 1970s the level of prescribed burning ranged from 10 to 15 

per cent, this figure dropped dramatically in the late 1990s and early 

2000s. 309 For example, in 2001/02 only 74,739 hectares (approximately 

three per cent) of prescribed burning was undertaken in the south-west. 310 

During this time the incidence of large wildfires increased significantly. As a 

result, the level of burning was restored to the 200,000 hectare nominal 

target in the mid 2000s. 

In 2006/07, 330,000 hectares was identified for prescribed burning in the 

south-west forest regions (approximately 13 per cent), though only 138,600 

hectares (approximately 5.5 per cent) was achieved due to a low number of 

suitable burning days. 311 However, this figure is only slightly lower than the 

10 year rolling average of 151,695 hectares (approximately six per cent) for 

prescribed burning in the region. 312 

Fernandes and Botelho note that prescribed burning constraints differ 

between south-eastern and south-western Australia, citing south-west 

Western Australia’s drier and more predictable weather; milder topography 

and relatively uniform forests as allowing “larger, safer, and more effective 

burns that can be conducted more times per year”. 313 The Committee 

recognises that the constraints in south-west Western Australia differ from 

those in Victoria and that, as such, prescribed burning programs adopted in 

Western Australia may not readily lend themselves to direct comparison with 

Victoria. Despite these differences, the Committee strongly supports the 

view that Victoria should adopt a similar broadscale approach to prescribed 

burning as is currently practised in Western Australia. While it may or may 

not be appropriate to treat a similar proportion of the Victoria public land 

estate by prescribed fire, the Committee welcomes the recent decision by 

DSE to adopt the Western Australian approach of landscape scale burns. 314 

The Committee welcomes DSE’s acknowledgement of the need for a 

significant increase in the level of fuel reduction and ecological burning. The 

Committee believes that such an increase is certainly supported by its 

research and the weight of the evidence that it has received. The Committee 

also welcomes DSE’s plans to introduce a range of measures for its future 

308 Department of Conservation and Land Management (WA), Annual Report 2003-04, 2004, p. 21. 

309 Department of Conservation and Land Management (WA), Annual Report 2003-04, 2004, p. 22. 

310 Department of Conservation and Land Management (WA), Annual Report 2001-02, Department of 

Conservation and Land Management, Perth, 2002, p. 61. 

311 Department of Environment and Conservation (WA), Annual Report 2006-07, Department of 

Environment and Conservation (WA), Perth, 2007, p. 114. 

312 Department of Environment and Conservation (WA), Annual Report 2006-07, Department of 

Environment and Conservation (WA), Perth, 2007, p. 117. 

313 P. M. Fernandes and H. S. Botelho, 'A Review of Prescribed Burning Effectiveness in Fire Hazard 

Reduction', International Journal of Wildland Fire vol. 12, no. 2, 2003, pp. 121-122. 



93

RSCH.016.001.0336 


fuel reduction and ecological burning outcomes but considers that 

performance against an annual state-wide target, measured in hectares, 

should remain one such measure. There are two main reasons for this. First, 

such a measure provides a ready means of gauging the average percentage 

of public land treated each year. Second, the retention of the current 

measure will provide a means of assessing future progress in increasing the 

level of fuel reduction and ecological burning. The Committee considers that 

the capacity for ready comparison between the current and future extent of 

prescribed burning may be reduced if the existing performance measure 

was entirely superseded. 

A further reason given by DSE for its decision not to quantify the size of the 

planned increase in prescribed burning by reference to the current measure, 

was that it is likely to be partly contingent on the finalisation of research into 

the ecological effects of planned fire regimes. 315 The Committee is 

particularly mindful of the need to increase the level of prescribed burning on 

public land in a manner that also establishes ecologically appropriate fire 

regimes across the state. The Committee considers that the future 

implementation of DSE’s Fire Ecology Strategies, which are being designed 

to refine the timing and pattern of prescribed burning in particular areas, is 

likely to make an important contribution in this regard. The Committee also 

notes that an annual prescribed burning target of five per cent of the public 

land estate is likely to support DSE’s planned shift towards significantly 

larger landscape-scale “mosaic” burns which produce a greater “patchiness” 

of burnt and unburnt areas. 316 The ecological effectiveness of the target 

recommended by the Committee, and the level of bushfire risk reduction 

achieved, should also be the subject of a regular review. The Committee 

considers that such a review should be conducted every three years. For all 

of the above reasons, the Committee concludes that DSE should adopt an 

annual prescribed burning target of five per cent of the public land estate of 

7.7 million hectares. This is equivalent to a total annual area of 385,000 

hectares. 

94 

315 E. Waller, Chief Fire Officer, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 7 April 2008. 

316 K. King, Executive Director, Land and Fire Management, Department of Sustainability and 

Environment, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 4 June 2007.; P. Harris, Secretary, Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 7 April 2008.

RSCH.016.001.0337 



That in order to enhance the protection of community and ecological assets, 

the Department of Sustainability and Environment increase its annual 

prescribed burning target from 130,000 hectares to 385,000 hectares. This 

should be treated as a rolling target, with any shortfalls to be made up in 

subsequent years. 


A comprehensive review of the effectiveness of the increased prescribed 

burning target in meeting ecological and bushfire suppression needs should 

be conducted every three years. 


The Department of Sustainability and Environment should report its 

performance against the increased prescribed burning target in its annual 

report, which should also include the following details: 

▪ 

the total area treated within each fuel management zone for each region; 

▪ the total number of burns conducted within each fuel management zone 

for each region; and 

▪ the extent to which planned ecological and fuel reduction outcomes were 

met for prescribed burns within each fuel management zone for each region 

(e.g. a summary of the results of the post-burn assessments to be conducted 

in accordance with recommendation 2.3 above). 

Targets and constraints 

Introduction 

The Committee has recommended above that the annual area of public land 

targeted for treatment by fuel reduction and ecological burning should be 

increased to a minimum of 385,000 hectares. This would represent an 

approximate tripling of the current annual target of 130,000 hectares. In this 

section, the Committee begins by reviewing the performance of DSE and its 

partner agencies against annual targets in previous years. The Committee 

then considers the constraints that have affected the achievement of 

previous targets and how these constraints may be managed to achieve the 

increased program recommended by the Committee and foreshadowed by 

DSE. 

95

RSCH.016.001.0338 


Performance against targets 

The Victorian Auditor-General found in 2003 that there had been a 

“consistent failure to achieve hazard reduction targets”. 317 Performance 

against annual targets for the period 1996/97 to 2006/07 is shown in Table 

2.3 below. 

Table 2.3 Fuel reduction burning on public land 1996/97 to 

2006/07. 318 

Year 

Target 

(ha) 

Completed 

(ha) 

2006/07 130,000 138,490 

2005/06 130,000 49,000 

2004/05 130,000 127,000 

2003/04 100,000 95,000 

2002/03 100,000 49,200 

2001/02 319 100,000 81,140 

2000/01 320 120,000 65,800 

1999/00 321 120,000 105,688 

1998/99 322 120,000 104,584 

1997/98 323 120,000 40,000 

1996/97 324 n/a 131,000 

The Committee notes that while there have been a number of years in which 

the total area treated by fuel reduction and ecological burning was 

significantly below the target for that year, DSE and its partner agencies 

have achieved, or been within five per cent of achieving, the annual target in 

three out of the four most recent years. The significantly lower area treated 

during 2005/06 has been explained as the result of particularly unfavourable 

weather conditions. 325 

96 


2003, p. 6. 

318 See: Annual Reports of DNRE and DSE 1996-97 to 2006-07; and Department of Sustainability 

and Environment, Submission, no. 168D, 9 January 2008. Attachment 2. 

319 Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Annual Report 2001-02, Department of 







Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 1998, p. 154. 






Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2006, p. 63.

RSCH.016.001.0339 


There has also been criticism of the performance against prescribed burning 

targets on a regional basis over a number of years. The achievement 

against area targets (and burn numbers) for selected regions are shown in 

Tables 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6. below. 

Table 2.4 Gippsland—fuel reduction and ecological burns: 

total area and number (planned and actual) 2003/04 to 

2006/07. 326 

Area treated (ha) 

Number of burns 

Planned Actual Actual as % 

of planned 



2006/07 51,149 66,844 131% 155 97 63% 

2005/06 53,743 14,018 26% 155 34 22% 

2004/05 46,606 51,840 111% .. .. .. 

2003/04 80,000 22,560 28% 190 96 51% 

Table 2.5: North East — fuel reduction and ecological burns: 


2006/07. 327 





Planned Actual Actual as % of 

planned 

2006/07 37,125 22,699 61% 140 46 33% 

2005/06 35,237 20,882 59% 140 53 38% 

2004/05 39,705 26,960 68% .. .. .. 

2003/04 35,00 16,207 46% 130 88 68% 

Table 2.6: North West — fuel reduction and ecological burns: 


2006/07. 328 







2006/07 37,125 22,699 61% 140 46 33% 

2005/06 35,237 20,882 59% 140 53 38% 

2004/05 23,935 21,460 90% .. .. .. 

2003/04 35,00 16,207 46% 130 88 68% 

326 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168D, 9 January 2008, 

Attachment 2. 


Attachment 2. 


Attachment 2. 

97

RSCH.016.001.0340 


The performance against area targets in Gippsland has also been 

significantly lower than the target identified in the relevant Fire Protection 

Plan for a number of years. The current plan, which dates from June 1999, 

sets out an average annual target for the region of 119,527 ha. 329 However, 

as shown in Table 2.4 above, the actual area targeted and treated in recent 

years has been well short of this figure. 

DSE informed the Committee that the target contained in the 1999 

Gippsland Fire Protection Plan was “almost entirely driven from a fire 

protection perspective”. 330 In other words, the target contained in the current 

plan does not incorporate the findings of more recent research into the level 

of burning needed for ecological purposes. As the Committee has noted 

above, DSE plans to integrate these research findings into future plans, 

including those for Gippsland. An example of the planned implementation of 

such increased burning for ecological purposes, which has recently been 

announced by DSE, is the “Southern Burn” in far East Gippsland which will 

treat approximately 52,000 hectares in coming years. 331 

A further aspect of performance against prescribed burning targets is the 

achievement against targets set for each fuel management zone. Data 

provided by DSE shows that performance against the target set for each 

zone also varies significantly between regions and across years. For 

example the proportion of the area planned for treatment within zone one 

which was actually treated during 2006/07 ranged from 26 per cent in the 

North West to 117 per cent in Port Phillip. 332 The state-wide performance 

against targets for each zone for the year 2006/07 is shown in Figure 2.14 

below. 

While the Committee considers that every effort should be made to meet 

planned area targets for fuel reduction burning within each zone it also 

agrees with the finding of the Auditor-General that: 

The impact of achievement or underachievement of fuel reduction targets needs to 

be considered with care. The actual risk reduction achieved through fuel reduction 

burning is not directly proportional to the area that has been fuel reduced. 

Successfully reducing fuel loads in 100 hectares in FMZ 1 (the highest risk zone) 

may achieve a significantly greater reduction in risk than fuel reducing 100 hectares 

in FMZ 2 or 3. 333 

98 

329 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Fire Protection Plan - Gippsland Region, 




331 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Gippsland Burning News: Autumn 2008, 



Attachment 2. 


2003, p. 56.

RSCH.016.001.0341 


Figure 2.14: Planned and actual area burnt by zone 

2006/07. 334 

80000 

70000 

60000 

Hectares 

50000 

40000 

30000 

Program 06/07 Area (ha) 

Total Estimated Area Treated 

20000 

10000 

0 

FMZ 1 FMZ 2 FMZ 3 FMZ 4 Other 

Constraints 

In this section, the Committee discusses the various constraints that apply in 

relation to fuel reduction and ecological burning. Factors highlighted by the 

Victorian Auditor-General as major constraints include: the narrowness of 

burning prescriptions and the associated planning requirements; resources; 

and weather. The Victorian Auditor-General has explained the effects of 

these constraints as follows: 

The necessarily strict conditions governing fuel reduction burning mean that 

considerable advance planning must be conducted for these burns. They can no 

longer be conducted on an opportunistic basis. The opportunity to conduct fuel 

reduction burning can be limited by competition for physical resources and limited 

availability of accredited supervisors as well as meteorological factors. 335 

The importance of resources, weather and climate has also been highlighted 

by DSE. Chief Fire Officer, Ewan Waller, explained the basis of the current 

annual target of 130,000 hectares in the following terms: 

334 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Forest Fire Weekly Report (29 June 2007), 


335 Victorian Auditor General, Fire Prevention and Prepardness, Government Printer for the State of 

Victoria, Melbourne, 2003, p. 6. 

99

RSCH.016.001.0342 


Weather and climate 

…my understanding was it was worked out through the resourcing we had and what 

that could achieve. And looking back over the history of the windows of opportunity 

you get — the number of burning days in this those burning periods — that was the 

basis. 336 

The majority of DSE’s prescribed burning is conducted during Autumn rather 

than the relatively more risky seasons of Summer and Spring. In general, 

Winters are too cold and wet to allow prescribed burning. The number of 

suitable days available for fuel reduction and ecological burning is further 

restricted by variations in weather, with particularly wet Autumns a major 

reason for those years in which the treated area targets have not been met. 

DSE has recently reviewed the possibility of increasing the level of burning 

conducted during Spring and the Committee understands that there has 

been some increase in the level of burning conducted at this time of the 

year. 337 DSE informed the Committee, however, that a significant increase in 

the Spring burning program may not be feasible and that it is currently 

exploring the opportunities for an increased level of burning during Winter. 338 

In addition to the season, a range of other factors, such as temperature, 

wind, fuel moisture and other “prescribed conditions”, also affect the number 

of days suitable for prescribed burning. A study of weather conditions over a 

seven year period in the Wombat State forest found an average of just 

under 11 days each year as suitable for prescribed burning. 339 Suitable days 

varied between four days in 1995 to 20 days in 1999. 340 A similar study near 

Omeo found an average of ten days per year, with a range of one to 22 days 

in each year, as suitable for prescribed burning. 341 Similar results have been 

found for Melbourne and locations in the North East. 342 In other words, the 

number of suitable days for prescribed burning each year is broadly 

consistent across the state. 343 

It is important to note, however, that the suitable days in any given year will 

vary from one region to another, such that there may be many more days 

suitable for prescribed burning statewide than at any particular location. 344 

DSE’s capacity to increase the extent of prescribed burning may therefore 

100 

336 E. Waller, Chief Officer, Fire and Emergency Management, Department of Sustainability and 

Environment, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

337 See for example: Department of Sustainability and Environment, Burning in Spring: Study Tour 

November 2005 Report, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005. 

338 E. Waller, Chief Fire Officer, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 7 April 2008. 


Bushfire Prevention: Are We Doing Enough? Conference, Institute of Public Affairs, 2003, pp. 4-6. 




Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne, 2003, pp. 105-106. 






Bushfire Prevention: Are We Doing Enough? Conference, Institute of Public Affairs, 2003, p. 7.

RSCH.016.001.0343 


be enhanced by increasing the mobility its operational resources for 

prescribed burning. It has also previously been noted that the number of 

suitable prescribed burning days could be increased by encouraging the 

conduct of burns during weekends and evenings. 345 

Funding and personnel 

Introduction 

Funding 

Inadequate resource allocation, particularly of personnel, was cited by a 

number of stakeholders as a constraint on the level of fuel reduction and 

ecological burning. A related argument, made by a number of stakeholders, 

was that there has been a loss, from DSE in particular, of the knowledge 

required to maintain an adequate broad-scale prescribed burning program. 

These stakeholders cited the decline in forestry, and the related loss of DSE 

employees with forestry experience, as a reason for the reduced extent of 

prescribed burning in recent years. 

The level of staff and other resources available for fuel reduction and 

ecological burning is largely dependent on an allocation of funding from 

DSE’s annual budget. 

DSE is required to record its annual expenditure on prescribed burning 

under the Code of Practice, 346 a requirement which also existed under the 

1995 Code of Practice. 347 However, DSE was unable to provide the 

Committee with details of its current or past annual expenditure on 

prescribed burning. DSE advised that it was unable to provide such 

expenditure figures because it does not yet have the Information 

Technology and Human Resources systems capable of distinguishing 

expenditure on prescribed burning from other expenditure. 348 

Prescribed burning expenditure reporting has been an issue for some time 

and has been discussed in two reports by the Auditor-General in 1992 and 

2003. 

In 1992 the Auditor-General made the following comments in relation to the 

then Department of Conservation and Environment’s funding of “fire 

prevention” (which at that time was defined as including both prescribed 

burning and other preventative activities, such as the preparation of longterm 

and short-term strategic plans): 349 





347 Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Code of Practice for Fire Management on 

Public Land, Department of Conservation and Natural Resource, Melbourne, 1995, p. 14. 


349 Victorian Auditor General, Special Report No. 16: Fire Protection, Victorian Auditor General, 

Melbourne, 1992, pp. 15,17,18. 

101

RSCH.016.001.0344 


The allocation of funds for fire prevention in the State's protected areas is not 

presented for parliamentary sanction within the annual Appropriation Act as a 

separate line item. Funding for fire prevention is provided from various funding 

sources across the Department's Land Resource Management program. 

Consequently, the Parliament and the taxpaying public are not informed of the 

amount of funds earmarked each year through the budget process for fire 

prevention. 350 

The Auditor-General went on to make the following findings in relation to 

funding for fire prevention: 

Audit is of the opinion that fire prevention is far too important an issue for funding 

decisions to be determined by annual budget negotiations or to be influenced by 

priorities placed on other activities, whether by government or the Department, in 

particular budget periods. 

The overall significance of fire prevention is such that the funds provided for fire 

prevention activities should be clearly identified in the Department's annual 

appropriation for the perusal of the Parliament and, subsequently, the public. 351 

In 2003 the Auditor-General considered the specific issue of DSE’s funding 

of fuel reduction burning from within its annual budget allocation. The 

Auditor-General found that there was a lack of transparency in this area, 

noting that DSE’s fuel reduction burning was “not fully costed internally”. As 

the Committee has noted above, this remains the case today. Another 

reason noted by the Auditor-General for the lack of transparency was the 

practice of borrowing staff from other business units to conduct burns. 352 

The Auditor-General found that “operational managers setting targets for 

fuel reduction each year do not have certainty that the resources will be 

available to achieve targets”. 353 To address this lack of transparency and 

certainty, the Auditor-General recommended that: 

• DSE fully cost its fuel reduction burning activities within its internal 

budgeting process; 

• allocate appropriate funding levels; and 

• allocate the cost of staff employed from other business units. 354 

Although the Committee was not able to determine the current level of 

funding for prescribed burning, the Auditor-General found that the former 

Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE) (DSE’s 

predecessor) allocated around $2 million towards a fuel reduction burning 

102 






2003, p. 6. 


2003, p. 6. 


2003, p. 7.

RSCH.016.001.0345 


target of 100,000 hectares in 2001-02, representing approximately four per 

cent of DNRE’s fire management budget for that period. 355 

The Auditor-General noted, however, that this figure did not reflect the total 

expenditure on fuel reduction burning because the salaries of DSE staff from 

other business units who assisted with this work were charged against their 

normal duties to their respective business units. 356 However, the Committee 

also notes that the figure of four per cent was apparently based on the 

combined cost of fuel reduction burning and fire suppression activities in 

2001-02 ($48.5 million) and did not include other activities within DNRE’s 

then “fire prevention and planning environment” program – such as the 

completion of District Fire Operations Plans and accreditation of personnel – 

which were then separately costed (at $16 million). 357 If these activities are 

included as part of the combined total expenditure on fire management for 

2001-02 (as they have been in more recent years), 358 the proportion of the 

budget allocated to fuel reduction burning for that year is closer to three per 

cent. 

Mr John Cribbes, Honorary Secretary, Macalister Four-wheel Drive Club, 

illustrated the apparently disproportionate levels of funding for bushfire 

prevention and suppression in the following terms: 

The fact that it is costing the taxpayers of Victoria millions of dollars to hire Elvis and 

bring it across the Pacific Ocean does not seem to be unattractive to some people. 

But the fact of the matter is there is no need for that attitude of fighting fire. You 

reduce the risk by working at the fire for 12 months of the year, not just 3 months in 

Summer. 359 

The Committee also notes that the total cost of fighting the 2002-03 

bushfires, at approximately $2 million a day, was apparently greater than the 

annual expenditure on prescribed burning by several orders of magnitude. 360 

The Committee was unable to determine whether DSE’s current annual 

expenditure on fuel reduction / ecological burning remains in the order of 

around three to four per cent of DSE’s total expenditure on fire 

management. The Committee notes, however, that although the current 

target for fuel reduction burning has increased by around one third, to 

130,000 hectares, the increase in DSE’s total expenditure on fire 


2003, p. 55. 


2003, p. 55. 


Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2004, pp. 130-131. 


Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007.; 

359 J. Cribbes, Honorary Secretary, Macalister 4WD Club, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 

2007. 

360 K. Simpson, 'Fires: State's $60m bill', viewed 21 April 2008, 

. 

103

RSCH.016.001.0346 


management has been significantly greater – total budgeted expenditure on 

fire management in 2006/07 was around $288.9 million. 361 

The Committee notes that DSE’s annual budget allocation for fuel 

reduction/ecological burning may vary from year to year according to the 

relative proportions of the total area that is burnt within each Fire 

Management Zone. As noted above, the Code of Practice defines four Fire 

Management Zones (although at the time of writing, fuel reduction and 

ecological burning continued to be conducted according to the five Fuel 

Management Zones under the 1995 Code). As has also been noted above, 

an important measure on which Fuel Management Zones vary is the 

intensity of fuel management required within the zone. For example, a burn 

located in Zone 1 would typically be designed to reduce the overall fuel 

hazard to or below the level of “moderate” across perhaps 90 per cent of the 

burn, while a burn in Zone 2 would typically be designed to reduce the 

overall fuel hazard to or below the level of “high” across perhaps 80 per cent 

of the burn. Accordingly, the financial cost of fuel reduction / ecological 

burning varies for each zone. This variation, and its potential impact on 

DSE’s total annual expenditure on prescribed burning, is illustrated in Table 

2.7 below. 

Fuel Management Zone 

and burning cost per 

hectare 362 

Table 2.7: Estimate of the cost of fuel reduction and 

ecological burning 2006/07. 

Total Estimated 

Area Treated 363 

Estimated Cost of Treatment 

Zone 1: $50–500 6,954 $ 342,700 - $ 3,477,000 

Zone 2: $30–300 39,317 $ 1,179,510 - $ 11,795,100 

Zone 3:

RSCH.016.001.0347 



That the Department of Sustainability and Environment, Department of 

Primary Industries, Parks Victoria & VicForests separately cost, and report, 

annual expenditure on fuel reduction burning, ecological burning and 

regeneration burning in their Annual Reports. 

The Committee was unable to obtain any data on the cost-effectiveness of 

fuel reduction burning, primarily because there do not appear to have been 

any cost-benefit studies of fuel reduction burning conducted in Australia. 364 

The Auditor-General has also previously referred to the need for a full costbenefit 

analysis to be conducted in relation to prescribed burning: 

…any consideration of ways to improve fuel reduction burning levels needs to be 

accompanied by rigorous risk and cost-benefit analysis. The existing prescriptions, 

which are essential for the safe conduct of fuel reduction burning, mean that the 

activity will remain costly, and fully meeting current targets would require a 

significantly increased outlay. The DSE’s understanding of the relationship between 

the level of fuel reduction burning and overall wildfire risk is currently limited. 

Analysing different outlay options, in order to see which gives the best overall 

reduction in risk, is a complex modelling task. Considerable work needs to be done in 

this area. 365 

The Committee agrees with the Auditor-General that there is a need for a 

full cost-benefit analysis of the prescribed burning program. Such a study 

would be of particular value in ensuring that future increases in prescribed 

burning, as recommended by the Committee and foreshadowed by DSE, 

are implemented in a way that maximises the overall reduction in risk across 

the State. 

A further benefit of such a study would be to demonstrate the reduced costs 

of fire suppression which flow from increased prescribed burning. Notably, 

fire suppression activities during 2006/07 necessitated additional funding to 

DSE, by way of a Treasurer’s Advance, of around $170 million. 366 As the 

Secretary of DSE noted during the Inquiry’s final public hearing, prescribed 

burning has the potential to significantly lessen budgetary impacts of this 

nature and magnitude. 367 

A further recommendation of the Auditor-General’s 2003 report concerned 

the need for greater flexibility in the funding of fuel reduction burning. The 

Auditor-General recommended that DSE: 



2003, p. 7. 


Melbourne, 7 April 2008.;Department of Sustainability and Environment, Annual Report 2006-07, 




105

RSCH.016.001.0348 


Personnel 

in consultation with the Department of Treasury and Finance, considers revised 

funding arrangements that introduce greater flexibility to allow for differing levels of 

funding to reflect factors such as seasonal variations 368 

One suggestion made to the Committee as to how this might be achieved 

was to establish a “prescribed burning trust fund” so that money not spent 

on prescribed burning in a given year could be carried over for expenditure 

on prescribed burning in later years, perhaps for a period of up to five 

years. 369 DSE responded to this suggestion by noting that funding is not a 

major constraint in relation to the conduct of its prescribed burning 

program. 370 While the Committee notes that this may be the case, it also 

notes that this may be difficult to demonstrate in the absence of reported 

data on DSE’s annual expenditure on prescribed burning. On balance, the 

Committee therefore considers that the suggestion of a “prescribed burning 

trust fund” has merit and should be implemented. 


That the Victorian Government establish a five year rolling fund which allows 

unused prescribed burning monies to be rolled over into future financial 

years for the purpose of subsequent prescribed burning activities. 

A number of stakeholders were critical of the current staffing policies of DSE 

and its partner agencies, in relation to fire prevention and suppression in 

general, and to prescribed burning in particular. Areas of concern raised by 

stakeholders included insufficient staffing levels, the decline in permanent 

staff, staff turnover, the skills mix of personnel, and the need for more 

effective succession planning. 

A range of stakeholders expressed the view that Victoria has experienced a 

significant decline in the number of locally based fire management staff. 371 

Stakeholders also noted that there had been a reduction in permanent staff 

and a shift towards employing officers primarily for the Summer fire season, 

who were subsequently unavailable for the prescribed burning program. 372 A 

further disadvantage noted in relation to such seasonally-based employment 

was the difficulties experienced by staff in becoming part of local 

communities. 373 Under-resourcing of operational regional staff within Parks 

Victoria was also noted as a particular problem. 374 

106 


2003, p. 7. 

369 Dr. K. Tolhurst, Submission, no. 137B, 9 October 2007, p. 7. 



371 See for example: The Bushfire Front, Submission, no. 121, 25 May 2007, p. 7; Community and 

Public Sector Union, Submission, no. 97, 24 May 2007, pp. 1,9; L. Lasham, Submission, no. 183, 31 

May 2007, p. 5; Australian Workers Union Victorian Branch, Submission, no. 10, 24 April 2007, p. 2. 

372 See for example, The Bushfire Front, Submission, no. 121, 25 May 2007, p. 7. 

373 The Bushfire Front, Submission, no. 121, 25 May 2007, p. 7. 

374 Community and Public Sector Union, Submission, no. 97, 24 May 2007, pp. 5,12.

RSCH.016.001.0349 


The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) expressed its members’ 

concerns regarding fire management staffing levels within DSE, DPI, Parks 

Victoria and VicForests as follows: 

There is an overwhelming belief amongst union membership that government 

resourcing is inadequate and a major hindrance in the ability to deliver adequate, 

effective and safe fire management practices within Victoria. This concern also 

extends in every instance to the government’s ability to deliver adequate public land 

management throughout Victoria. 375 

CPSU also reported that its members were concerned that prescribed 

burning targets may not be realistic given current staffing levels. 376 CPSU 

identified DSE’s “model of cover” as contributing to the problem of 

seasonally-based staff shortages for prescribed burning. The model of cover 

is a series of memorandums of understanding and service agreements with 

DPI, Parks Victoria and VicForests, which is used to determine staffing 

levels for fire suppression. In addition to noting that the model of cover had 

been “overwhelmingly criticised” by members for failing to provide sufficient 

fire suppression personnel, CPSU reported concerns about the lack of a 

similar inter-agency model for staffing the prescribed burning program 

throughout the year. 377 CPSU recommended both an increase in the level of 

permanent staff and the development of a model of cover which would 

provide for fire management across 365 days of each year. 378 

A related problem is that of staff turnover. Mr Ritchie, Regional Director 

North East, DSE, referred to the role of an adequate prescribed burning 

program in preventing the loss of skilled staff: 

It was a problem for us a few years ago. I remember 10 years ago we had a long 

spell with not many fires, and we lost a lot of skilled people. People lost the 

enthusiasm, the interest and the expertise because of the lack of experience. So the 

burning program is important. 379 

A range of stakeholders expressed concerns regarding the typical mix of 

skills held by fire management staff within DSE and its partner agencies. 

The loss of practical experience and knowledge associated with the decline 

in forestry was cited by a number of stakeholders. 380 

East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce (EGWT), in common with a number of 

stakeholders, argued that effective management of the bush requires people 

with practical forestry and bush skills and sufficient familiarity with a local 

area. 381 EGWT argued that people with such skills are able to deal with the 

inevitable variations in fuel loads, moisture and related factors and are 

375 Community and Public Sector Union, Submission, no. 97, 24 May 2007, p. 5. 


377 Community and Public Sector Union, Submission, no. 97, 24 May 2007, pp. 9-10. 


379 K. Ritchie, Regional Director North East, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript 

of evidence, Mount Beauty, 28 November 2007. 

380 See for example: The Bushfire Front, Submission, no. 121, 25 May 2007, p. 7.; Plantations North 

East, Submission, no. 243, 18 September 2007, p. 2. 


107

RSCH.016.001.0350 


therefore best able to make the necessary “on the spot” decisions regarding 

fuel reduction burning. 382 

The decline in bush skills was also illustrated by Mr Alan Ashworth, an 

owner and operator of an earth-moving business in the North East, who 

referred to the lack of experience in the use of earth-moving machinery 

within DSE and its partner agencies. 383 The Committee notes that this is an 

issue of particular concern given the specialist skills required to operate 

such machinery in the steep and timbered terrain where bushfire prevention 

and suppression activities are often conducted. Mr Ashworth noted that 

while younger staff were now generally university educated, they lacked 

experience in the operation of such machinery and the practical experience 

required to work safely and effectively in the bush. 384 

The significance of this problem for prescribed burning and fire suppression 

was confirmed by Mr Ritchie, Regional Director North East: 

…getting a good bulldozer driver who knows the bush and can work the bush is a 

challenge and will be a challenge in the future, because a high proportion of our 

bulldozer drivers have come up through the long held Forests Commission process 

and have had a lot of experience. 385 

Mr Chris Rose, Manager East, Parks Victoria, advised the Committee that 

the need for personnel with practical skills had been recognised by Parks 

Victoria and outlined recent developments in this area: 

I think there is a need to have a balance. You want some old hard heads who have 

grown up in the bush and have lived in the bush, and you want some people with 

different skills. If you have got a mix, then you have probably got it right. We 

recognise this very much, and the last thing we want are university graduates with no 

practical experience. We have actually signed a partnership with several universities 

to provide students with field experience working beside…some of the people that 

you have met today to ensure that when they do start work with us in the future they 

have actually got some practical experience as well as the theoretical knowledge. 

We recognise that and are working on it. 386 

Dr Kevin Tolhurst also argued for an improvement in the skill mix of public 

land fire management staff. Dr Tolhurst noted that during the previous 20 

years public agencies had tended to recruit generalist staff with generalist 

tertiary qualifications and that there was a need for more fire behaviour and 

related specialists: 

Maintaining viable fire regimes in the landscape requires the combination of a high 

level of scientific understanding, good communication skills, and good “bush” skills… 

DSE is strong on the bureaucratic “process” side, but very weak on the technical / 

science side. There is a dire need to demand University graduates be well educated 

in the science behind land management. DSE must then recruit people who are 

108 


383 A. Ashworth, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 November 2007. 

384 A. Ashworth, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 November 2007. 



386 C. Rose, Manager East, Parks Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Mount Beauty, 28 November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0351 


highly skilled, not just equipped with some generalist science, resource management 

or environmental science degree…what we need is Forest Scientists, Landscape 

Ecologists or Conservation Biologists. 387 

A range of stakeholders expressed concerns regarding the ageing workforce 

available for prescribed burning and other fire management activities. These 

stakeholders emphasised the need for more effective succession planning. 

The Australian Workers Union (AWU) informed the Committee that the 

average age of its fire management members is approaching 49 years. 388 

DSE acknowledged the challenges posed by succession planning. Mr 

Ritchie, Regional Director North East, DSE, outlined the issue in the 


We do have an active process both within this region and across the state looking at 

succession planning at the moment, particularly at field crew level, where we are 

trying to make sure that we recruit people to work in the field and, as far as possible, 

retain their services over a lengthy period of time. 

People do not stick around as long as they used to, and that is one of the challenges. 

A lot of our crew succession comes through the Summer firefighters. They provide a 

good resource. We get a lot of returnees year after year; we have put some of them 

onto three year contracts to try to encourage them to remain. Often they provide the 

core of both the next generation of field crew and some of the professional staff as 

well, because a lot of them come with different backgrounds. It is a real problem; it 

does not solve the succession problem well or completely by any means. Getting 

people who know and understand the bush and who are be able to lead crews and to 

make decisions in the field, to work in it for a long period is one of our big challenges, 

particularly at that crew leader level. 389 

Conclusion 

The Committee was unable to determine the total number of operational 

staff available for prescribed burning in recent years. However, DSE 

informed the Committee that there had been an increase in operational and 

support staff of more than ten per cent between 2002 and 2007. Under the 

current arrangements between DSE, VicForests, Parks Victoria, and 

Melbourne Water, around 2,500 fire accredited personnel (and a further 

1,000 coordination and support personnel) are available each fire season. 390 

DSE also informed the Committee that changes to the Project Fire Fighter 

(PFF) Program, to allow the recruitment of personnel on three year contracts 

(for the period October to May each year), had boosted the number of 

operational personnel available for prescribed burning. DSE advised the 

Committee that under the PFF Program, between 400 and 600 additional 

personnel were available for the 2006/07 prescribed burning program. 391 


388 Australian Workers Union Victorian Branch, Submission, no. 10, 24 April 2007, p. 2. 




391 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, pp. 2-3. 

109

RSCH.016.001.0352 


110 

The Committee considers that the recent increase in the number of DSE 

personnel is likely to have made a significant contribution to meeting the 

statewide prescribed burning target for 2006/07. However, the Committee 

also agrees with the view expressed by a range of stakeholders that the 

level of permanent, or long-tenured, locally based staff within DSE, DPI, 

Parks Victoria and VicForests should be further increased to ensure an 

adequate level of prescribed burning, particularly during years when weather 

conditions are unfavourable. The need for an additional increase in the level 

of such staff is further emphasised by the increased annual prescribed 

burning target that has been recommended by the Committee. Moreover, 

the Committee agrees that further initiatives are required to address the 

problems of staff turnover, the current skills mix of personnel, and the 

problem of an ageing workforce through more effective succession planning. 


That the Victorian Government provide recurring funding for a significant 

increase in regionally-based, permanent, or long-tenured, fire management 

personnel dedicated to the prescribed burning program. The increase in 

personnel should be consistent with the level required to achieve an annual 

prescribed burning target of 385,000 hectares. 

The pool of available personnel should be suitably diverse and possess a 

wide variety of disciplines and skill sets, including practical skills. The 

Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner agencies 

should also increase the proportion of personnel with specialist tertiary 

qualifications, including fire behaviour specialists, forest scientists, 

landscape ecologists and conservation biologists. 

DSE and its partner agencies should also prioritise the development of 

programs to reduce the level of staff turnover and the problem of the ageing 

workforce, through more effective succession planning. 

The risk of escaped burns 

The practice of prescribed burning carries with it the risk that a particular 

burn may escape beyond its planned boundaries. Although this happens in 

a relatively small number of burns, the consequences can be financially and 

environmentally significant. However, the consequences of an overly risk 

averse approach to prescribed burning are likely to be significantly more 

serious in the long term. Government and community support for an 

appropriate level of risk is therefore of crucial importance to the success of 

the prescribed burning program. 

Perhaps the best known prescribed burn escape in recent years was the 

one which occurred in the Wilsons Promontory National Park in March 2005. 

The escape resulted from a planned burn of 20 hectares at Tidal River, 

which was ignited by Parks Victoria under DSE’s prescribed burning 

program. Fire escaped from the area of the planned burn in subsequent 

days and formed a bushfire which burnt more than 6,000 hectares of the 

National Park and threatened Tidal River Village. More than $2m was spent 

on suppressing the fire, which significantly disrupted the Park over a period

RSCH.016.001.0353 


of weeks and led to the evacuation of around 600 campers. The fire also 

had a significant impact on tourist activity. 392 

In 2005 the Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner (OESC) 

completed a review of the Wilsons Promontory escaped burn and of burn 

escapes and practices since 2002. 

The OESC found the number of burn escapes to be less than two per cent 

in total. 393 Of 2,151 burns undertaken between 1 January and Winter 2005, 

48 burns escaped the planned burn area and 12 of these were classified as 

“significant escapes”. The OESC found that there were common factors 

across the state which had contributed to burn escapes, and that these 

included a failure to follow accepted practice or documented policies and 

procedures – both in the planning and implementation stage of the burn. 394 

The OESC also found that the majority of burns escaped in the days 

following ignition during the “control phase” of the burn. 395 

The OESC found that DSE and its partner agencies had already 

commenced a number of measures to improve the safety and delivery of the 

prescribed burning program. These included the appointment of regional fire 

prevention coordinators, improving the regional burn approvals process, 

establishing a risk management project and the development of upgraded 

FireWeb mapping tools. 396 

The OESC also found that DSE personnel involved in prescribed burning 

are recognised as highly trained and experienced experts but face pressure 

to meet targets. Some DSE staff considered that there was a lack of 

organisation support and noted fatigue management as a further problem. 

The report also found that personnel and resources at the time of year when 

prescribed burning is conducted were either not available or at a 

minimum. 397 The OESC concluded that some burn escapes are “inevitable” 

and that fire management personnel had experienced fire behaviour, due to 

the current drought, which had not been encountered previously. 398 

A number of stakeholders told the Committee that the risk of escaped burns 

had led to the development of a “risk-averse” culture within DSE and its 

partner agencies. The threat of litigation was also identified as a potential 















111

RSCH.016.001.0354 


Smoke 

constraint on prescribed burning in the Esplin Report. 399 The Committee 

considers, however, that an awareness by personnel of the potential for 

litigation arising from escaped prescribed burns does not necessarily 

amount to a “risk-averse” culture. Moreover, DSE’s achievement of higher 

prescribed burning levels in recent years suggests that risk aversion is 

currently not a significant constraint on this activity. 

The smoke released from prescribed burning, like the smoke caused by 

bushfires, can have a range of negative impacts on individuals and 

communities, including “adverse effects on people’s respiratory health, 

aesthetics, tourism and business”. 400 

Ms Marion Edwards’ submission highlighted her experiences of the health 

impacts of smoke from prescribed burning as follows: 

The extent of prescribed burning seems too be too hot, too large and too often The 

smoke haze is extremely thick and we, the community, are suffering health issues 

with this constant problem. 401 

Ms Caroline Doolan expressed a similar sentiment, asserting that: 

There have been days in this area with all of the prescribed burning where the smoke 

was worse than what we experienced during the recent bushfires. The windows of 

our house all had to be kept closed to keep the smoke out. It gets into the back of the 

throat and makes it sore and we don’t have asthma or bronchial conditions. 402 

Other stakeholders raised concerns about the scheduling of prescribed 

burns during peak tourism times. Mansfield Shire expressed the problem as 

follows: 

Fuel reduction burns appear to be inadequate, under resourced and more 

importantly to Mansfield Shire, inappropriately timed. Mansfield Shire experiences its 

highest visitation periods during school holidays, long weekends and public holidays. 

These peak periods have on occasions coincided with the times when DSE and 

parks Victoria have been undertaking prescribed burns. 403 

Murrindini Shire expressed similar concerns: 

As a matter of principle, council fully supports the ongoing provision of cool weather 

burns – if conditions allow. Whilst it is acknowledged that there is a narrow window of 

opportunity to meet the criteria to conduct successful management burns, there is an 

impact on the municipalities such as Murrindindi Shire that has a large component of 

public forest and relies on tourism visitation. Wherever possible, the burn strategies 

112 





401 M. Edwards, Submission, no. 82, 23 May 2007, p. 1. 

402 C. Doolan, Submission, no. 74, 23 May 2007, p. 1. 

403 Mansfield Shire Council, Submission, no. 123, 25 May 2007, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0355 


need to be managed in a way that meets the needs of both forestry and tourism 

issues. 404 

The importance of improved communication by agencies regarding the 

timing and location of prescribed burning was also raised by a number of 

stakeholders. Wellington Shire Council expressed the importance of such 

communication to the maintenance of community support for prescribed 

burning operations as follows: 

Local communities are not concerned to see smoke in their area if they area aware 

that it is from a controlled burn as they know that the aim is to create a safer situation 

for the future. Having said that, communication to the public and nearby landholders 

is very important when burns are occurring and Council would like to see better 

communication by fire authorities when this happens. 405 

The timing and communication of prescribed burning was raised as a 

particularly important issue by wine industry stakeholders. The effect of 

“smoke taint” on growing grapes can render the harvested fruit unusable for 

the production of wine. The Victorian Wine Industry Association of Victoria 

advised the Committee that the combined effect of the Victorian bushfires 

since 2003 had been an estimated loss of $70 million in wine sales due to 

smoke taint. 406 During the Inquiry, the Committee visited the King Valley 

vineyard region, which was particularly adversely affected by smoke taint 

during the recent bushfires. During the visit, the Committee was informed 

that research was being conducted to determine how future prescribed 

burns may be timed to coincide with periods when grapes may be less 

vulnerable to smoke taint. 

There are a range of factors which have the potential to alter the impacts of 

smoke from prescribed burning, including: wind direction; weather on 

subsequent days; fuel moisture; and the time of day that a fire is ignited. 407 

DSE is also required to determine and periodically review, in consultation 

with the EPA, guidelines on smoke management issues associated with its 

prescribed burning operations. 408 The Guidelines are required to account for 

current knowledge of air movements and smoke dispersal. 409 The 

Committee also notes that research into the management of smoke from 

prescribed burning operations is the subject of two current research 

programs by the Bushfire CRC: 

• B2.1: Behaviour of smoke plumes and hazes from rural or urban 

fires; and 

404 Murrindindi Shire Council, Submission, no. 142, 28 May 2007, p. 1. 


406 Wines of Victoria, Submission, no. 213, 13 June 2007, p. 3. 







113

RSCH.016.001.0356 


• B2.2 Smoke composition from prescribed and wildfires and health. 410 

The Committee also recognises that the media plays a role in influencing 

public perceptions and attitudes towards prescribed burning. Unfortunately, 

in relation to smoke from prescribed burning, the media is often critical of the 

Government’s management of the prescribed burning program. The 

following editorial opinion piece from the Herald Sun provides such an 

example: 

Choking smoke over Melbourne is ruining some of the best days of Autumn 

and all because the Department of Sustainability and Environment is doing a 

year's burning off in a week. Victorians need to feel safe from bushfires that have 

caused some of the state's greatest catastrophes. But people coughing and 

spluttering as the smoke drifts over the city are asking why the burnoff cannot be 

done in stages. Better management is needed. The department responsible for the 

burnoffs has failed to show concern for people who have no choice but to suffer the 

smoke. They have also failed to consider those people suffering from respiratory 

problems who have had to shut themselves indoors. 411 

Given that the level of prescribed burning is likely to significantly increase in 

future years, the Committee believes that greater public acceptance of the 

impacts of prescribed burning will be in some part dependent upon fostering 

improved relationships with the media. As such, the Committee believes that 

DSE and its partner agencies should make concerted efforts to increase the 

media’s understanding of the importance of prescribed burning. This issue is 

discussed in greater detail in Chapter 6. 

In conclusion, the Committee appreciates that prescribed burns will 

inevitably have immediate negative impacts upon local communities. 

However, the windows of opportunity to conduct prescribed burns are 

already narrow, and may become narrower as a result of climate change. 

When compared to the environmental, economic and social impacts that 

result from large bushfires, the Committee considers that communities are 

likely to become increasingly accepting of prescribed burns. However, as 

will be discussed in Chapter 6, the Committee also considers that there is 

further scope for DSE to increase community involvement in prescribed 

burning programs to maximise opportunities to alleviate the impacts due to 

smoke. 

Forestry and regeneration burning 

Timber harvesting on public land, and the subsequent regeneration burning 

of harvested coupes, also has the potential to affect DSE’s fuel reduction 

and ecological burning programs. The revised Code of Practice notes the 

following benefits of regeneration burning: 

114 

410 Bushfire CRC, 'Managing Prescribed Fire in the Landscape', viewed 10 April 2008, 

. 

411 Herald Sun, 'Smoking ban', viewed 1 May 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0357 


Regeneration burning after timber harvesting provides for the dual purpose of 

stimulating regeneration as well as reducing the post-harvest fuel hazard. 

This in turn provides protection for newly established forest and allows for the safe 

conduct of future prescribed burns in the vicinity. 412 

The Esplin Report found that regeneration burning had historically involved 

a significant diversion of resources which would otherwise have been 

available for fuel reduction and ecological burning. 413 For example, the 

report found that regeneration burns in the Gippsland region represented 63 

per cent of all planned fires during the period 1991 to 2003. 414 The 

Committee notes, however, that VicForests has assumed responsibility for 

regeneration burning in the east of the state (where the majority of timber 

harvesting occurs) since it began operations in 2004. Although DSE 

supports regeneration burning operations conducted by VicForests with the 

provision of planning, personnel and equipment, DSE advised the 

Committee that costs are subsequently recovered from VicForests. 415 

A further impact of forestry on the fuel reduction and ecological burning 

programs is the effect that regenerating forest has on the management of 

fuel reduction and ecological burning operations. As DSE informed the 

Committee, the presence of regenerating forest can increase the difficulty of 

managing prescribed burning for other purposes, particularly at certain 

stages of the regrowth cycle: 

There is no evidence that supports the premise that a reduction in forest 

management activity has increased the occurrence of fires. Young regrowth (less 

than 10 years of age) often carries low fuel loads following harvesting (provided the 

area has been previously slash burnt). As fuel loads increase with time since 

establishment more moisture is trapped under the developing forest canopy, making 

these areas relatively safe from fire under moderate, and sometimes high, fire 

danger conditions. However, more mature regrowth does burn vigorously as fire 

danger increases, and there are periods in the forest growth cycle where regrowth is 

both flammable and susceptible to damage by fire. While in this flammable and 

vulnerable state, the presence of regrowth makes managing prescribed burning more 

difficult. Patchy regrowth from minor forest uses is most difficult to protect. 416 

DSE concluded: 

The positive and negative impacts arising from forestry activities are manageable if 

risks and trade-offs are understood and managed. Localised impacts of prescribed 

fire on future timber resources need to be considered with not achieving broad area 

fire management outcomes whilst intending to minimise the occurrence and impact 

of future severe wildfires. 417 








416 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168C, 31 August 2007, p. 13. 


115

RSCH.016.001.0358 


The Committee received no evidence of an adverse impact by forestry 

operations on the opportunities for fuel reduction and ecological burning. 

Moreover, the Committee notes that the protection of existing timber 

resources is dependent on an adequate level of prescribed burning. The 

Committee also notes that the transition to what is essentially a purchaserprovider 

arrangement between VicForests and DSE for regeneration burning 

has significantly reduced the financial cost of conducting regeneration 

burning for DSE. The Committee notes that the savings achieved within 

DSE through this arrangement would now be available for other initiatives, 

such as an increase in the level of dedicated personnel for prescribed 

burning as recommended above. 

Finding 2.4: 

The Committee finds that there is no evidence of an adverse impact by 

forestry operations on the level of prescribed burning. 

Alternatives to prescribed burning 

The Committee notes that in addition to prescribed burning, there are 

several alternative approaches to fuel management available to land 

managers. As noted in the Code of Practice, the use of these alternatives 

must be in accordance with the relevant fire protection strategy. 418 

Alternative approaches to fuel management include grazing (discussed in 

Chapter Five); slashing; chaining; ploughing; rolling; mulching; and the 

application of herbicide. 419 

The Committee notes that although dependent upon a range of issues, 

proximity to water bodies and cultural values for example, alternative 

approaches may be appropriate in certain situations and may be more costeffective 

than types of prescribed burning. For example, the Esplin Report 

noted that in comparison to link burning (a type of prescribed burning), 

chaining may be a “safer and more cost effective means by which to 

construct buffers” in the Mallee. 420 However, it is the Committee’s view that 

prescribed burning currently represents the most cost-effective and practical 

means by which landscape scale fuel reduction can be achieved across the 

majority of the public land estate. 

116 







RSCH.016.001.0359 

Chapter 3: Biodiversity and Flood 

Chapter 

3 

Biodiversity and Flood 

If you have a look at the hills after our recent fires, because of the build-up of scrub 

and debris and flammable material on the floor, they have been burnt to bare mineral 

earth and the water simply runs straight off and contributes to the massive flooding 

we have had. 421 

Introduction 

This chapter considers the environmental impacts of the recent bushfires in 

Victoria. The environmental impacts which the Committee is required to 

consider fall into two categories and arise under terms of reference three 

and fourteen respectively. The first category concerns the effects of the 

recent bushfires on Victoria’s biodiversity, including wildlife, and other 

natural assets, including water quality and quantity. The second category 

concerns the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 and the extent to which it 

was a consequence of the recent bushfires and, ultimately, of public land 

management practices. 

The first part of this chapter considers the biodiversity impacts of the 

bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07. Biodiversity has been defined as “…the 

variety of all living life-forms including plants, animals and micro-organisms, 

the genes they all contain and the ecosystems of which they form a part”. 422 

The importance of biodiversity has been described in the following terms: 

Biodiversity encompasses a range of living things and ecosystems, which are 

constantly evolving and adapting to environmental changes. Our living wealth needs 

to be maintained and enhanced for our economic, cultural, social and [psychological] 

well-being. 423 

The current scientific uncertainty regarding the long term biodiversity 

impacts of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires are discussed, together with 

the view, which was expressed by a range of stakeholders, that those 

impacts are likely to be severe. The impact of the recent bushfires on water 

quality and quantity, which also arises under Term of Reference number 

three, has been discussed in Chapter Two. 

421 N. Barraclough, Gippsland Apiarists Association, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007. 

422 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'What is Biodiversity?' viewed 19 May 2008, 

. 

423 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'What is Biodiversity?' viewed 19 May 2008, 

. 

117

RSCH.016.001.0360 


In the second part of this chapter, the Committee outlines the impact of the 

Gippsland flood of June/July 2007. The Committee then considers the 

scientific and stakeholder evidence as to whether the flood was a 

consequence of the recent bushfires and/or of poor land management 

practices, particularly a lack of prescribed burning. 

Biodiversity impacts 

Introduction and background 

The bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 affected a combined area of 

approximately 2.3 million hectares, more than the area burnt by the Black 

Friday fires of 1939. The 2002/03 Alpine fires burnt approximately 1.19 

million hectares of public land and 90,000 hectares of private land. 424 The 

2006/07 bushfires, located primarily to the west and south of the area burnt 

in 2002/03, affected around 1.05 million hectares of private and public land, 

and were the longest recorded fires in Victoria’s history, running for 69 

days. 425 While a full analysis of the ecological damage caused by the 

2006/07 fires has yet to be completed, a significant amount of work has 

been undertaken for the 2002/03 fires. The Committee notes that the 

findings regarding the environmental impacts of the 2006/07 bushfires, are 

likely to be similar in kind to the environmental impacts of the 2002/03 fires 

which are necessarily outlined in greater detail in this report. 

DSE’s publication The Recovery Story – The 2003 Alpine Fires (“The 

Recovery Story”) details the environmental impact of the 2002/03 bushfires 

and the work done to assist environmental recovery, as well as the support 

provided to private landholders, in the two and a half years following the 

fires. According to The Recovery Story, the “scale and intensity of the fires 

has transformed the environment of the Victorian Alps for decades to 

come”. 426 The Recovery Story also notes that the 2002/03 fires caused “a 

major impact on the natural biodiversity of the region, particularly critically 

endangered species” and that the species and vegetation most affected 

were those which were “already under threat, degraded or low in number 

before the fires”. 427 The impacts of the 2002/03 fires on native flora, fauna 

and water are considered in turn. 

Figure 3.1 shows the fire severity and the area burnt during the 2003 and 

2006/07 bushfires. The map also illustrates the 130,000 hectare area which 

burnt during both the 2003 and the 2006/07 bushfires. The map depicts the 

following fire severity categories: 

118 

424 Department of Sustainability and Environment, The Recovery Story: The 2003 Alpine Fires, 


425 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Key Issues Identified from Operational Reviews of 

Major Fires in Victoria 2006/07, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007, p. 2. 




Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 8.

RSCH.016.001.0361 


• crown burn – 50 to 100 per cent of forest crowns are burnt; 0 to 50 

per cent of forest crowns are scorched; 

• crown scorch – 60 to 100 per cent of forest crowns are scorched; 0 

to 50 per cent of forest crowns are burnt; 

• moderate crown scorch – 30 to 70 per cent of forest crowns are 

scorched; 

• light crown scorch – 0 to 35 per cent of forest crowns are scorched; 

and 

• unclassified – may include treeless areas with patches that have 

been burnt or lightly burnt. 428 

The severity of the 2002/03 bushfires is indicated by the fact that 

approximately eight per cent of the total area burnt fell within the highest 

severity category of “crown burn” and around 41 per cent was in the second 

severity category of “severe crown scorch”. 429 The “mixed species 

eucalypts” was the forest type which was most extensively burnt by the 

2002/03 fires, although these were found to be regenerating well within two 

to three years of the fires. 430 

However, some species, such as Mountain and Alpine Ash, are killed by 

intense fires. For example, the Alpine fires burnt almost 160,000 hectares of 

Alpine Ash forests, with damage to stands in the North East, Tambo and 

Central Gippsland forest management areas, necessitating extensive 

salvage operations. 431 Similarly, over 75,000 hectares of Snow Gum was 

also burnt and it is anticipated that it will be decades before these trees 

regenerate to their pre-fire height and maturity. 432 

The 2002/03 bushfires also severely burnt alpine moss beds on the Bogong 

High Plains, necessitating rehabilitation work, such as the installation of 

weirs and the replanting of thousands of indigenous wetland species. 433 

428 The fire severity category details are taken from: Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

The Recovery Story: The 2003 Alpine Fires, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Melbourne, 2005, p. 58. The categories are broadly identical to those depicted in Figure 3.1. 






Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 8; Department of Sustainability 

and Environment, The Recovery Story: The 2003 Alpine Fires, Department of Sustainability and 

Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 58. 





119

RSCH.016.001.0362 


Figure 3.1: Bushfire severity 2003, 2006 & 2007. 434 

120 

434 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 14 May 2008.

RSCH.016.001.0363 


The impact of the 2002/03 fires on native alpine fauna has been described 

by DSE as “potentially devastating”, since native fauna in high-altitude 

environments have a comparatively limited capacity to recover from fire. 435 

The long-term survival of some species was placed at risk by the fires. Of 

particular concern are five alpine species which were listed as critically 

endangered before the fires: the Alpine Water Skink, Alpine Tree Frog, 

Spotted Tree Frog, Bush-tailed Rock Wallaby and the Mountain Pygmypossum. 

436 The loss of hollow-bearing trees, fallen trees and understorey, 

due to the intensity of the fire, compounded the loss of habitat for native 

fauna. 437 

In some cases, the loss of vegetation caused by the 2002/03 fires led to 

increased predation of native fauna by introduced fauna. For example, over 

80 per cent of the habitat of the Mountain Pygmy Possum is estimated to 

have been affected by the 2002/03 fires, including the destruction of alpine 

heath vegetation. This has increased the species’ exposure to predation, 

particularly by foxes and wild dogs. The endangered Long-footed Potoroo 

has also been subject to increased predation by foxes after eight of the 

twelve Special Management Areas identified for its protection were burnt 

during the 2002/03 bushfires. 438 

A fox control program was one of a number of pest animal programs 

established across more than 261,000 hectares of national parks, State 

parks and State forests following the 2002/03 fires. 439 In addition, DPI 

increased the level of trapping and baiting for wild dogs on public land and 

private properties adjacent to fire-affected areas. By mid June 2005 1,084 

wild dogs had been trapped. This was in addition to the 1,899 wild dogs that 

were trapped as part of the regular ongoing wild dog management 

program. 440 Other pest animals which are the subject of ongoing programs 

and research include feral horses, pigs, goats and deer. 441 

As shown in Figure 3.1, the 2006/07 bushfires subjected significant areas to 

fire severities comparable to those experienced in 2002/03, including “crown 

burn” and “crown scorch”. As with the 2002/03 fires, the 2006/07 fires 

destroyed or damaged the habitats of a number of endangered species, 

including the Long Footed Potoroo, the Mountain Pygmy Possum and the 

Barred and Mountain Galaxias. The fires also caused further damage to 







438 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'In the North East Forests', viewed 19 May 2008, 

. 

439 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'In the North East Forests', viewed 19 May 2008, 

. 

440 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Providing Practical and Financial Assistance for 

Affected Farmers and Private Industries ', viewed 14 May 2008, . 


Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, pp. 40-41. 

121

RSCH.016.001.0364 


fragile alpine ecosystems, including the alpine moss beds and ecosystems 

which were fire affected in 2002/03. 442 

The uncertainty of the cumulative environmental effects of the 2002/03 and 

2006/07 bushfires has been expressed in the following terms: 

Large-scale fires in our alpine region have been historically infrequent, but two major 

fires have now occurred within four years. … the ability of alpine vegetation and 

fauna to recover from fires in such rapid succession is relatively unknown. 443 

The Arthur-Rylah Institute (ARI), a leading Victorian centre for ecological 

research, specialising in flora, fauna and biodiversity issues, conducted 

extensive environmental field work and analysis following the 2002/03 

bushfires. ARI is also conducting assessments of the effects of the 2006/07 

bushfires. Current projects include the effects of the fires on Alpine moss 

beds, including those also burnt in 2002/03, and on two species of Alpine 

stonefly which was affected by both the 2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires. 444 

While the immediate and long term impacts of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 fires 

have been primarily negative, the fires have also provided opportunities for 

environmental restoration. Weed control is a notable example. The 

environmental impact of weeds is significant since they compete with 

indigenous plants, threaten rare plant species, reduce the habitat and food 

sources for native fauna and provide shelter for introduced fauna. The 

Recovery Story details the opportunities for weed control provided to DSE 

and Parks Victoria by the 2002/03 fires. Since weeds often germinate and 

re-establish more rapidly than native species following fire, the 2002/03 fires 

provided DSE and Parks Victoria with an opportunity to eradicate or control 

major weed infestations. 445 Additional funding was provided to facilitate 

weed control programs across 80,000 hectares of national parks and State 

forests following the fires, focusing on the control of such species as English 

Broom, Willow, Orange Hawkweed and Himalayan Honeysuckle. 446 This 

work, which was in addition to the agencies’ regular weed control programs, 

was carried out over a two and a half year period and included weed control 

on 350 private properties. 447 

More generally, Parks Victoria has reported that infestations of 15 of the 18 

most commonly reported priority weeds in Victoria had stabilised or reduced 

in the majority of assessed parks over the period 2000 to 2005. 448 At the 

time of writing, the Committee was advised that additional funding had been 

122 

442 Ministerial Taskforce on Bushfire Recovery, 2007 Report from the Ministerial Taskforce on 

Bushfire Recovery, Victorian Government, Melbourne, 2007, pp. 11, 35. 

443 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Bushfire Recovery', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 

444 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Bushfire Recovery', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 




Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 36.; Department of Sustainability 

and Environment, personal communication, 29 February 2008. 


448 Parks Victoria, State of the Parks 2007, Parks Victoria, Melbourne, 2007, p. 125.

RSCH.016.001.0365 


provided for an increase in weed control programs in response to the 

2006/07 fires and that this work was ongoing. 449 

Stakeholder evidence 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE noted that fire has always been, and 

will continue to be, a key influence on Australia’s landscape, flora and 

fauna. 450 DSE stated that the impact of fires on parks and forests is 

“generally not unnatural or catastrophic” and that large bushfires burning 

during very dry conditions “are both natural and inevitable”. 451 DSE’s 

submission did not comment directly on the biodiversity impacts of the 

recent bushfires but instead noted that: 

Fire is a key environmental force influencing our plant and animal communities. … 

The flora and fauna change continually in response to their various experiences, or 

absences, of fire – in ways that are often long-term and complex. When 

inappropriate, fire can cause harm to biodiversity. However, when appropriate, fire 

can also be critical to the health of our fire adapted and dependent ecosystems. 452 

DSE referred to “fire regimes” as the key determinant of the influence of fire 

on ecosystem health. A “fire regime” is the cumulative effect of fire over time 

and across the landscape, as determined by the frequency, season, 

intensity and patchiness of fire. DSE concluded that the recent bushfires 

were “part of a complex fire regime for those and surrounding areas” and 

that the biodiversity implications of the fires will depend on future fire events, 

and the potential impacts of climate change in future decades. 453 

In its submission to the Inquiry, CSIRO also emphasised “fire regimes”, and 

their interaction with “functional groups” as the main determinant of the 

biodiversity impacts of fire. 454 The functional group concept refers to the life 

history characteristics of organisms, including their capacity to regenerate 

following fire, minimum reproduction age and lifespan. 455 It is the basis of 

the “ecological vegetation classes”, which as discussed in Chapter Two, 

have been defined by DSE for the purposes of determining ecologically 

appropriate prescribed burning regimes. 

Uncertainty regarding the long-term biodiversity impacts of the recent 

bushfires was also noted by other stakeholders. For example, Environment 

East Gippsland argued that the severity of the biodiversity impacts of the 

2006/07 bushfires are unclear because it is unknown how common or 

widespread bushfires have been over the course of history. 456 






454 CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Submission, no. 166, 31 May 2007, pp. 14-15. 

455 CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Submission, no. 166, 31 May 2007, p. 15. 

456 Environment East Gippsland Inc., Submission, no. 225, 4 June 2007, p. 1. 

123

RSCH.016.001.0366 


However, a significant number of stakeholders argued that the short term 

biodiversity impacts of the recent bushfires were severe and may also pose 

significant threats to biodiversity in the long term. Stakeholders who 

emphasised the negative biodiversity impacts of the recent bushfires 

included: 

• Mr Bruce Esplin, the Emergency Services Commissioner, who 

argued that “large, very hot fires are having a much more destructive 

impact on our landscape than any low intensity fuel reduction burn 

would ever have”; 457 

• East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, which argued that 

the impacts of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 fires on biodiversity and 

catchments would persist many years; 458 

• The Alpine Resorts Co-ordinating Council, which described the 

significant impact of fire on biodiversity and water quality and quantity 

at Alpine Resorts; 459 

• Mr Gavin Jamieson, who referred to a range of biodiversity impacts, 

including those which would affect the livelihood of apiarists, 

including: the destruction of areas of koala habitat; the loss of 

“shelterbelts” on farms which would not return to productivity for 10 to 

20 years; and the loss of honey and pollen production for an average 

of five to six years for most trees and shrub species; 460 

• The Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, 

which argued that the effect of recent Government policies on wildlife, 

flora and watersheds had been devastating; 461 

• Mr Norman Endacott, who stated that the combined effects of the 

2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires had seriously compromised 

biodiversity, and that an estimated 9.5 million birds were killed by the 

2002/03 bushfires alone; 462 

• East Gippsland Bird Observers club, which also argued that the scale 

and intensity of the recent bushfires had caused a dramatic change in 

the natural habitat of numerous birds and wildlife. The club stated that 

such dramatic changes can result in the extinction of particular 

species in an area and sharp population declines for others; 463 

124 

457 B. Esplin, Emergency Services Commissioner, Emergency Services Commissioner, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 4 June 2007. 

458 East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, Submission, no. 165, 30 May 2007, p. 3. 

459 Alpine Resort Coordinating Council, Submission, no. 218, 20 June 2007, p. 2. 

460 G. Jamieson, Submission, no. 136, 28 May 2007, pp. 1-2. 

461 Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, Submission, no. 24, 2 May 2007, p. 

3. 

462 N. Endacott, Submission, no. 100, 24 May 2007, p. 1. 

463 East Gippsland Bird Observers Club, Submission, no. 164, 30 May 2007, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0367 


• Timber Towns Victoria, which argued that some sensitive species 

may not regenerate following the recent fires and referred to the 

impact on water quality and to declines in fresh water species caused 

by ash and soil erosion; 464 and 

• Wellington Shire Council, which emphasised the likely long term 

impacts of the recent bushfires on biodiversity. The Council also 

referred to the severe erosion which had occurred following recent 

fires, causing mudslides in the Dargo, Barkly, Wonnangatta, 

Macalister and Mitchell rivers, contamination of town water supplies 

and fish deaths. 465 

A number of stakeholders, including several of those noted above, 

concluded that prescribed burning has a relatively benign impact on 

biodiversity in comparison to large and intense bushfires of the kind 

experienced in 2002/03 and 2006/07. A number of stakeholders also 

identified current land management practices, including insufficient 

prescribed burning, as having caused, or contributed to, the scale and 

intensity of the recent bushfires. Mr Gary Lyttle, Chair, Volunteer Fire 

Brigades Victoria (VFBV), stated that the ecological and environmental 

impact of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires was insignificant in areas 

where fuel reduction burning had been conducted compared to areas where 

it had not. 466 The Bushfire Front referred to the recent bushfires as 

examples of large, high intensity fires which are sometimes referred to as 

“megafires” and argued that such fires are the product of “failed land 

management practices”. 467 

The inherent biodiversity risks of failing to limit large and intense fires 

through more frequent burning has also been acknowledged by DSE: 

Frequent burning does not necessarily result in species loss and tends to establish a 

more diverse patchwork of burnt and unburnt areas. Maintaining areas with very long 

inter-fire periods and allowing fuel levels to increase is more likely to support large 

and destructive fires. 468 

Discussion and conclusion 

As the Committee has outlined above, there is a significant level of scientific 

uncertainty regarding the long-term impact of the recent bushfires on 

Victoria’s biodiversity. However, the immediate impact on fragile ecosystems 

and vulnerable wildlife is clear and can only be described as potentially 

devastating. Moreover, the recent bushfires have placed the survival of 

464 Timber Towns Victoria, Submission, no. 113, 25 May 2007, p. 2. 


466 G. Lyttle, Chairman, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 19 


467 The Bushfire Front, Submission, no. 121, 25 May 2007, p. 2. 

468 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Land and Biodiversity at a Time of Climate 

Change: Using and Managing Fire for Biodiversity and Asset Protection', viewed 14 May 2008, 

. 

125

RSCH.016.001.0368 


some ecosystems and wildlife in doubt. The Committee is mindful that the 

longer term effects of bushfires on biodiversity are explained by particular 

“fire regimes” and that inappropriate fire regimes may damage biodiversity 

and other natural assets. On balance, the Committee finds it is likely that the 

bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 were both the result, and the most recent 

examples, of inappropriate fire regimes. The inherent risk to the long-term 

viability of Victoria’s biodiversity posed by bushfires of the scale, intensity 

and frequency of those experienced in 2002/03 and 2006/07 is one that 

must be mitigated. As with the protection of the community and its assets, 

an increase in prescribed burning across the landscape – in a manner which 

re-establishes mosaics of burnt and unburnt patches of vegetation – 

represents the best strategy for managing the risk to biodiversity and other 

natural assets. 

As the Committee has noted in Chapter One, there is significant uncertainty 

regarding the particular fire regimes that existed in different areas of Victoria 

prior to the arrival of Europeans. In any case, it is highly unlikely that pre- 

European fire regimes could be re-established given the fragmentation and 

other environmental changes that have since occurred. In the Committee’s 

view, it is the Victorian community, as the current custodian of the State’s 

biodiversity that must bear the responsibility of determining and 

implementing appropriate fire regimes to meet current and future 

environmental challenges. 

Finding 3.1: 

The bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 were of a scale, intensity and frequency 

which resulted in an immediate and severe impact on Victoria’s biodiversity. 

Finding 3.2: 

The scale and intensity of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires were the result 

of inappropriate fire regimes, and in particular, of an insufficient level of 

landscape-scale prescribed burning. 

Finding 3.3: 

An increase in prescribed burning across the landscape, as recommended in 

Chapter Two, in a manner which mimics natural fire regimes, represents the 

most appropriate strategy for minimising the immediate and long-term 

threats to biodiversity from large and intense bushfires. 

126

RSCH.016.001.0369 


The Gippsland Flood 


The Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 was the worst experienced by the 

region for many years. The flood caused extensive and widespread damage 

to homes, businesses, farm land, a range of public and private assets and 

imposed further hardship on a community still recovering from the Great 

Divide bushfires of 2006/07. The Committee notes that the North East and 

Gippsland also experienced significant storm events following the 2002/03 

bushfires causing environmental damage and water quality impacts on the 

catchments. 

The 2006/07 flood followed a period of unusually high rainfall in the Great 

Dividing Range, with a number of locations experiencing rainfall and 

subsequent flooding of a magnitude which has an “average recurrence 

interval” of up to 100 years. 469 Significant flooding occurred in the Gippsland 

Lakes and in several river systems, including the Macalister, Mitchell, Avon, 

Thomson and Snowy. 470 

Flood severity data for the catchments worst affected by the floods is 

presented in Table 3.1. 

Table 3.1: Flood severity in key catchments. 471 

Watercourse / lake Flood severity Peak flow 

Macalister River (below Lake 

Glenmaggie) 

1 in 100+ year flood 147,000 ML / day 

Mitchell River 1 in 75 year flood N/A 

Avon River 1 in 45 year flood 83,700 ML / day 

Thomson River 1 in 25 year flood 73,800 ML / day 

Traralgon Creek 1 in 16 year flood 14,300 ML / day 

Gippsland Lakes 

1 in 20 to 1 in 50 year flood 

(depending on location) 

N/A 

469 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, pp. 1, 6. 

470 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, pp. 1, 6. 

471 West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, 'Floods and River Rehabilitation', viewed 9 

May 2008, 

.; West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, Annual Report 2006/07, West 

Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, 2007, p. 34. 

127

RSCH.016.001.0370 


The intensity of the rainfall that preceded the flood is illustrated by Figure 

3.2, which show that much of Gippsland received significantly more than the 

total average rainfall for June during the week ending 3 July 2007. 

A number of the highest rainfall totals were recorded in areas of the 

Gippsland foothills that had been burnt by the 2006/07 bushfires, while less 

but significant rainfall occurred further east in areas that had been burnt by 

the 2002/03 bushfires. 472 The extent and intensity of the 2002/03 and 

2006/07 bushfires has been discussed earlier in this chapter and is 

illustrated above in Figure 3.1. The impact of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 

bushfires on the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 is considered in detail 

later in this section. 

Figure 3.2: Victorian rainfall distribution for week ending 

3 July 2007. 473 

The flood affected a significant number of communities including Licola, 

Tinamba, Newry, Sale, Bairnsdale, Stratford, Lakes Entrance, Loch Sport, 

Paynesville, Raymond Island and a number of smaller Gippsland Lakes 

communities. 474 The geographic extent of the surface water during the flood, 

as derived from satellite image, is illustrated in Figure 3.3 

128 

472 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, p. 1. 


474 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0371 


Figure 3.3: June/July 2007 Gippsland flood – extent of 

surface water. 475 

The financial cost of the flood was significant. According to Emergency 

Management Australia, insured and uninsured losses totalled $15 million. 476 

However, the full financial cost was significantly higher. The flood recovery 

package announced by the Government included funding for the following 

measures: 

• more than $30 million to rebuild flood-damaged roads and bridges; 

• $20 million for clean-up works by the Department of Sustainability 

and Environment and local Catchment Management Authorities, 

including: repairs to roads and tracks; debris removal; and the repair 

and replacement of fencing; 

• over $3 million for Local Government infrastructure projects, such as 

community halls, footbridges, streetscape improvements and 

pathway upgrades; 

475 

Geoscience Australia, 'Gippsland Flooding Revealed', viewed 16 May 2008, 

. 

476 Emergency Management Australia, 'EMA Disasters Database', viewed 21 May 2008, 

. 

129

RSCH.016.001.0372 


• low interest loans of up to $200,000 for flood-affected farmers, 

businesses and not-for-profit organisations; 

• a $545,000 tourism package to assist with encouraging the return of 

tourists to the region; and 

• $445,000 for flood warning systems for the McAlister, Avon and 

Thomson rivers. 477 

A $1 million joint Commonwealth-State Community Recovery Fund was also 

established to assist “grass-roots” community groups and organisations with 

flood recovery activities and projects by providing grants of up to $10,000 

and $25,000 respectively. 478 

The combined recovery expenditure on the June/July 2007 Gippsland flood 

significantly exceeded the estimated $45 million worth of damage caused by 

the Gippsland floods of 1998. 479 

Environmental impact 

While floods are a natural phenomenon and play an important role in 

maintaining ecosystem health, the Committee is of the view that the 

environmental damage caused by the June/July Gippsland flood was not 

solely the result of natural processes. 

The Committee notes that while the immediate environmental damage is 

clearly evident, a comprehensive assessment of the flood damage will take 

considerable time. The Committee also notes that a range of major 

rehabilitation works are underway, but recognises that some effects of the 

flood may be irreversible. 

Following the flood events, the Committee undertook several site visits to 

flood affected regions and was shown a range of environmental impacts 

including: 

• areas where avulsion and/or debris had caused creek/river diversion; 

• significant levels of creek/river bank erosion; 

• areas where debris was restricting the natural flow of creeks/rivers; 

130 

477 Office of the Premier, 'Over $60 Million Flood Recovery Package for Gippsland', viewed 16 May 

2008, 

. 

478 Minister for Community Services, 'Funds Now Available for Gippsland Flood Recovery', viewed 16 

May 2008, 

. 

479 

National Nine News, 'Bushfires influencing Gippsland floods', viewed 16 May 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0373 


• grazing lands where topsoil had been removed and where rock debris 

had been deposited during the flood; 

• creeks/rivers laden with unnaturally high sediment loads; 

• creeks/rivers devoid of riparian vegetation; and 

• major weed infestations on river banks and grazing lands. 

Some of these impacts are discussed in further detail below. 

The effects on aquatic life of sedimentation are likely to have been 

significant. Sedimentation can clog the gills of fish and alter the habitats 

needed for spawning, resulting in significant fish mortality. 480 The effects of 

sedimentation can also damage the habitat of aquatic invertebrates. 481 A 

study conducted by the EPA found that a flash flood in the Buckland River 

following the 2002/03 bushfires resulted in a “slug” of sediment which 

caused a major fish kill in the Ovens River and damage to other aquatic 

life. 482 While the Committee is unaware of any similar studies of the effects 

of the Gippsland flood of June/July on fish and invertebrates, it notes that 

this event is likely to have had similar effects. 

At the time of writing, the Australian Platypus Conservancy was conducting 

a study into the effects of the June/July 2007 flood and the preceding 

bushfires on platypus numbers. The study determined that although 

relatively mild floods may have a positive effect on platypus habitat, severe 

flooding is likely to result in mortalities through stress or drowning, and 

through the effects of erosion on habitat. 483 

The Committee is mindful that floods occur as part of a natural cycle which 

is important to the long-term health of ecosystems, species and 

populations. 484 Floods are known to encourage breeding, spawning, the 

dispersal and germination of seed, and to increase food sources for aquatic 

birds. 485 Floods also have the potential to increase agricultural productivity 

by depositing soils and nutrients and by providing water for irrigation. 486 In 

480 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, p. 2.; Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, 'VicFishInfo: Biological Information for Management of Native 

Freshwater Fish in Victoria, Key Problems and Management Strategies', viewed 21 May 2008, 

. 

481 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, p. 2.; Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, 'VicFishInfo: Biological Information for Management of Native 

Freshwater Fish in Victoria, Key Problems and Management Strategies', viewed 21 May 2008, 

. 

482 Environment Protection Authority Victoria, 'Bushfires and River Health: Effects of the 2003 

bushfires', viewed 21 May 2008, . 

483 F. Allen, 'Counting Platypus After Fire, Flood', Weekly Times, 7 May 2008, p. 23. 

484 Middelmann, M.H. (Ed.), Natural Hazards in Australia: Identifying Risk Analysis Requirements, 

Geoscience Australia, Canberra, 2007. p. 64. 





131

RSCH.016.001.0374 


summary, floods are a natural phenomenon which, like bushfire, can be a 

benefit or a source of potential devastation for the environment. 

As with bushfires, it is the scale and intensity of a flood that determines the 

nature of its environmental impacts. In the Committee’s view, the Gippsland 

flood of 2006/07 was of a severity which had both immediate and long-term 

negative impacts on the environment. Moreover, the environmental impacts 

of the flood, including erosion, sedimentation and threats to aquatic 

biodiversity, were clearly compounded by the preceding bushfires. 

The impact of recent bushfires 

Background 

In this section, the Committee considers whether the recent bushfires 

caused, or significantly contributed to, the Gippsland flood of June/July 

2007. 

The former Standing Committee for Agriculture and Resource Management 

(SCARM) 487 has defined “flood”, in Floodplain Management in Australia: 

Best Practice Principles and Guidelines, as: 

Relatively high water levels caused by excessive rainfall, storm surge, dam break or 

a tsunami that overtop the natural or artificial banks of a stream, creek, river, estuary, 

lake or dam. 488 

In Australia, the majority of floods are caused by heavy rainfall and are 

divided into the two broad categories of riverine flooding and flash flooding, 

although as noted below, flash floods may also contribute to riverine floods. 

Geoscience Australia has categorised the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 

as an example of a riverine flood, which it defines as follows: 

Riverine floods occur following heavy rainfall when watercourses do not have the 

capacity to convey the excess water. They occur in relatively low-lying areas 

adjacent to streams and rivers. In the flat inland regions of Australia, floods may 

spread thousands of square kilometres and last several weeks. In the mountain and 

coastal regions of Australia, flooding is often less extensive and of shorter duration, 

[but] with higher flow velocities. 

... 

In some cases natural blockages at river mouths may also cause flooding of 

estuaries and coastal lake systems or exacerbate riverine flooding in tidal sections of 

132 

487 SCARM supported the former Agricultural and Resource Council of Australia and New Zealand 

(ARMCANZ), the predecessor to the Primary Industries Ministerial Council (PIMC), which comprises 

all Australian / State / Territory and New Zealand government ministers responsible for agriculture, 

food, fibre, forestry, fisheries and aquaculture and rural adjustment policy, see: Australian 

Government PIMC - NRMMC, 'PIMC - NRMMC', viewed 19 June 2008, . 

488 CSIRO, Floodplain Management in Australia: Best Practice Principles and Guidelines, CSIRO 

Publishing, Melbourne, 2000, p. 97.

RSCH.016.001.0375 


rivers. Examples of natural blockages include storm tide, high tide and sand berms 

which constrict river entrances. 489 

In contrast, flash flooding can occur in almost any location and is caused by 

comparatively brief but intense rainfall. The effects of flash floods are 

generally localised. 490 

Geoscience Australia has identified a range of factors which may influence 

the likelihood that a flood will occur including: 

• the volume, spatial distribution, intensity and duration of rainfall over 

the catchment; 

• catchment conditions before the rainfall event (e.g. a wetter 

catchment will absorb less rain, resulting in increased runoff); 

• ground cover, topography and groundwater tables; 

• the carrying capacity of the watercourse or stream network; 

• the influence of tides; 

• the degree of urban and rural development within the catchment and 

floodplain; and 

• the presence of works designed to slow or confine water flows, such 

as dams, detention basins and levees. 491 

Notably, Geoscience Australia has also identified the capacity of bushfires to 

exacerbate flash flooding: 

Flash flooding is exacerbated in areas where there is a high proportion of impervious 

or near impervious surfaces which promote run-off. …. Areas where loss of 

vegetation has occurred, because of bushfire or activities such as overgrazing, also 

have a high amount of near-impervious surfaces. 492 

The Committee notes that the same or similar effects would apply in the 

case of some riverine floods and that flash flooding, of the kind experienced 

in Licola, also contributes to riverine floods downstream. Similar effects 

occurred during the mud slide and previous flash flooding in Licola 

preceding the major flood event. 493 Licola was inundated with up to a metre 






Geoscience Australia, Canberra, 2007. p. 61. These factors are broadly identical to those identified by 

DSE in its submission to the inquiry, see: Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 

2007, p. 2. 



493 Sydney Morning Herald, 'Mudslides, Floods Damage Homes in Licola', viewed 21 May 2008, 

RSCH.016.001.0376 


of water, which contained ash and other debris from the bushfires and which 

left the town coated in a layer of mud. 494 Almost a year later, and despite 

significant recovery efforts by the local community and land management 

agencies, the effects of the flood on the town, its surrounding infrastructure 

and on the banks and tributaries of the Macalister River, remained clearly 

visible to the Committee during a site visit to the area. 


The submission provided by DSE and its partner agencies argued that the 

“primary cause” of the June/July flood was likely to have been the intensity, 

volume and duration of the storm event in a catchment that had received 

rainfall earlier in June. 495 The submission was equivocal on the question 

whether the recent bushfires had contributed to the severity of the June/July 

2007 flood. DSE referred to a review sponsored by the Victorian 

Government following the 2002/03 fires which found “strong evidence that 

fires can contribute to increased flooding and rates of soil redistribution,” but 

stated that the limited quantitative data currently available made it, “difficult 

to attribute the contribution of the fire over and above the effect of high 

intensity rainfall”. 496 DSE also referred to predictive computer modelling of 

estimated peak flows by the Bureau of Meteorology which had failed to find 

“any significant differences in the model parameters between burnt and 

unburnt catchments”. 497 However, DSE advised the Committee that it was 

developing a research program to quantify the impact of the 2006/07 fires on 

water quality and quantity and that: 

…understanding the specific impacts of bushfires on the 2007 Gippsland flood will 

result from spatial analysis of the bushfire severity and rainfall intensity, taking into 

account the range of topographical and other factors… 498 

In summary, the submission reflected a degree of uncertainty regarding the 

impact of the recent bushfires on the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 and 

an acknowledgement of the need for further data and analysis. 

Mr Clinton Rodda, General Manager, Water Supply, Southern Rural Water, 

was also unable to provide the Committee with a definitive view on the 

impact of the 2006/07 bushfires on the flood: 

It is too early for us to give a categorical answer to that because the analysis has not 

been done in terms of rainfall and run off coefficients. I think it is fair to say that it was 

a very significant rainfall event. … there is lots of evidence around that bushfire 

134 

Licola/2007/02/24/1171734059621.html>.; West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, 

Annual Report 2006/07, West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, 2007, p. 31. 

494 Sydney Morning Herald, 'Mudslides, Floods Damage Homes in Licola', viewed 21 May 2008, 

. 




498 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168B, 3 December 2007, p. 2.

RSCH.016.001.0377 


impacts lead to increased run off and potentially faster run off, and that certainly 

could be the case here, but it is just a bit early for us to actually say. 499 

In contrast, the vast majority of stakeholders who provided evidence to the 

Committee were of the view that the 2006/07 bushfires did contribute to the 

magnitude of the Gippsland flood. A number of stakeholders also identified 

the bushfires, and ultimately public land practices prior to the bushfires, as a 

major cause of the flood. 

East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce (EGWT) informed the Committee that it 

was “in no doubt” that the damage caused by the Gippsland flood was the 

result of rapid run-off from burnt catchments. 500 EGWT provided the 

following explanation of the effect of the recent bushfires on run-off and the 

subsequent flooding: 

In the June / July [2007] event, the catchment was so denuded over such a wide 

area that the run-off co-efficient was probably near 100 per cent, whereas in a 

balanced forest with a mosaic of different age burns and undergrowth, this coefficient 

would have been halved at least. This would have spread the discharge into 

streams over a much longer period and at this rate, the streams would have been 

able to cope much better. 501 

Simon Ramsay, President of the VFF, also stated that there was “no doubt 

that the bushfires contributed to a large part of the damage done due to the 

East Gippsland floods”. 502 

While Forest Fire Victoria did not explicitly state that the bushfires of 

2006/07 contributed to the Gippsland flood, it did note that the magnitude of 

the flood was apparently disproportionate to the preceding rainfall events. 503 

Forest Fire Victoria also referred the Committee to research which suggests 

that the following interrelated bushfire effects in catchments produce the 

“probability of greatly accelerated and higher than usual run-off”: 

• the likelihood of significantly more intense thunderstorms from 

increased surface heating and updrafts following the death of tree 

foliage; 

• soil disturbance, resulting in erosion and the transport of soil particles 

into streams, rivers and lakes, due to lost buffering capacity from 

trees and shrubs which otherwise protect catchment soils from the 

physical impact of rainfall; and 

• the development of hydrophobic soils – while water is generally able 

to infiltrate the soil matrix in an unburnt forest, bushfire can increase 

the tendency of soils to repel water and increase erosion. FFV cited 

499 C. Rodda, General Manager, Water Supply, Southern Rural Water, Transcript of evidence, 

Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

500 East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce, Submission, no. 63B, 4 September 2007, p. 1. 

501 East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce, Submission, no. 63B, 4 September 2007, p. 1. 

502 S. Ramsay, President, Victorian Farmers Federation, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 

2007. 

503 Forest Fire Victoria Inc., Submission, no. 201C, 25 September 2007, p. 4. 

135

RSCH.016.001.0378 


research conducted in the East Kiewa Catchment following the 

2002/03 fires which found flow increases of between 50 and 100 per 

cent. 504 

Forest Fire Victoria summarised the effects of bushfire on catchments as 

follows: 

There is incontrovertible evidence that when the canopy of a eucalypt forest is killed 

or defoliated by a very intense fire, soil on the site is exposed and the quantity and 

quality of water flowing into watercourses from post-fire rain events are seriously 

affected. 505 

Mr Jim Wilson of Wellington Shire Council articulated the view, which was 

expressed by a number of stakeholders, that the recent bushfires 

significantly exacerbated the flood: 

Our perception is that the fires have made the flood bigger, faster and more 

destructive because of the lack of coverage in the catchment area. Normally I guess 

even with a high rainfall event the speed with which the waters would rise would be a 

bit slower. 506 

Mr Neville Penrose, Regional Director, Gippsland Region, DSE, 

acknowledged the impact of the 2006/07 bushfires on run-off and erosion in 

the following terms: 

…it has denuded about 600 hectares of the catchment of the Gippsland Lakes. A lot 

of the tributary catchments have been denuded of a lot of cover. So the impact of 

that on run off and on soil erosion has been reasonably significant. 507 


The Committee is mindful that a complete understanding of the effects of the 

recent bushfires on the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007 may be 

contingent on the finalisation of DSE’s spatial analysis of bushfire and 

rainfall intensity. The Committee also recognises that the rainfall event 

which preceded the flood was significant and agrees with DSE that rainfall 

intensity is likely to have made a significant contribution to the flood. 

However, the Committee also considers that there is sufficient scientific and 

stakeholder evidence regarding the effects of large and intense bushfires on 

catchments generally, and on the Gippsland flood in particular, to conclude 

that the recent bushfires did significantly exacerbate, and may have caused, 

the flood of June/July 2007. 

In reaching this conclusion, the Committee is mindful that the 2002/03 and 

2006/07 bushfires affected a combined area of approximately 2.3 million 

hectares, an area of unprecedented size in the recorded history of the State. 

While the severity of the fires was not homogenous across the landscape, 

136 

504 Forest Fire Victoria Inc., Submission, no. 201C, 25 September 2007, pp. 5-6. 

505 Forest Fire Victoria Inc., Submission, no. 201C, 25 September 2007, p. 1. 

506 J. Wilson, Director, Corporate Services, Wellington Shire Council, Transcript of evidence, 

Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

507 N. Penrose, Regional Director, Gippsland, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0379 


large areas were burnt with a high degree of intensity, resulting in significant 

loss of vegetation and susceptibility to increased run-off and erosion. The 

Committee notes that there is a significantly smaller risk of such run-off 

levels, and of subsequent flooding, from smaller and less intense bushfires 

and from prescribed burning. 

As with bushfires, flood management is inherently a risk management 

process. 508 Bushfires, particularly fires of the size and severity of those 

experienced in recent years, are a major, and increasing, risk factor for the 

incidence and severity of flooding and erosion. It follows that effective 

bushfire management, particularly efforts to mitigate the frequency, scale 

and intensity of bushfires through increased and more strategically placed 

prescribed burning, must also be seen as a flood risk mitigation tool. This 

recognition of the role of bushfire management in managing flood risk is also 

consistent with the “integrated whole of catchment approach” to flood 

management advocated in the Victoria Flood Management Strategy (“the 

Strategy”), which recognises that: 

Management of land uses in the catchment directly affects its rainfall runoff 

characteristics and hence the nature of flooding generated from the catchment. In 

turn, the management of floods and floodplains can have significant impacts on local 

and downstream environments. 509 

The Committee agrees with the view expressed in the Strategy that, as with 

bushfire management, an integrated approach to flood risk management 

requires governments, land and fire management agencies, Catchment 

Management Authorities, municipal authorities, and the local community to 

work together to define priorities, roles and responsibilities and to identify 

opportunities for cooperation. 510 

508 See: Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria Flood Management Strategy, 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 1998, p. xvi. 

509 Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria Flood Management Strategy, 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 1998, p. xv. 

510 Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Victoria Flood Management Strategy, 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 1998, pp. xv-xxi. 

137

RSCH.016.001.0380 


Finding 3.4: 

That the bushfires of 2002/03 and 2006/07 significantly exacerbated, and 

contributed to the extent of the Gippsland flood of June/July 2007. 

Finding 3.5: 

That previous land management practices, in particular an insufficient level 

of prescribed burning at a landscape-scale contributed to the scale and 

intensity of the 2002/03 and 2006/07 bushfires, thereby increasing the 

severity of the recent flood and its environmental impacts. 

Finding 3.6: 

That flood risk management is dependent on effective bushfire risk 

management. Accordingly, an increased level of prescribed burning across 

the landscape – to regenerate the natural mosaic of burnt and unburnt 

vegetation which prevents excessive run-off from rainfall events – is integral 

to mitigating the risk of severe floods of the kind experienced by Gippsland 

in June/July 2007. 

138

RSCH.016.001.0381 

Chapter 4: Bushfire Suppression Infrastructure 

Chapter 

4 

Bushfire Suppression Infrastructure 

Introduction 

The Inquiry’s sixth, seventh and ninth terms of reference require the 

Committee to consider several forms of infrastructure which are of particular 

importance on public land for bushfire suppression and which also support 

fire prevention works. These include: permanent and strategically placed fire 

breaks and containment lines; the provision and maintenance of large water 

points to assist with aerial suppression; and the provision and maintenance 

of serviceable access tracks and signage. This chapter considers the impact 

of each of these strategies in relation to the frequency, scale and intensity of 

bushfires in Victoria. 

It is clearly beyond the scope of the current Inquiry to consider all aspects of 

bushfire suppression. However, the Committee is mindful that prevention 

and suppression are effectively two sides of the same coin in relation to 

bushfire management and cannot be considered in isolation. Moreover, 

bushfire suppression technology is a field of constant and rapid 

development, both in Australia and internationally. For this reason, key 

bushfire suppression technologies, including aerial suppression and remote 

sensing for the early detection of bushfires, are discussed in the final section 

of this chapter. 

Roads, access tracks and signage 

The Committee received a significant amount of evidence from stakeholders 

regarding the provision and maintenance of serviceable access tracks and 

signage for recreational and emergency requirements. The Committee has 

referred to the major recreational use of the public land road and track 

network by four wheel drive (4WD) users in Chapter Five. Accordingly, this 

section focuses primarily on the adequacy of the road and track network on 

public land for the purposes of fire management. As with permanent fire 

breaks and large water points, the provision of access tracks for fire 

management requires a balance between the need for access on the one 

hand, and the environmental impact and financial cost of access tracks on 

the other hand. 

139

RSCH.016.001.0382 


A range of stakeholders stated that the existing access track network on 

public land was insufficiently maintained and had become overgrown in 

many areas. 511 This view was expressed by Mr Kevin Higgins as follows: 

The tracks need to be better maintained than they are. They are better than they 

were and they are cutting out steeper tracks, but there needs to be a bit more money 

spent on tracks. Certain tracks are not up to scratch, and they never will be as long 

as every 10 years is the time they run a dozer over it. At one particular time the 

Heyfield machine used to be run all the time. Now it seems to be here or there, 

parked doing nothing or over at Dargo, whereas Dargo used to have its own. There 

needs to be a bit more money thrown at tracks, for recreation as well as everything 

else. 512 

The Committee received a number of submissions which emphasised the 

importance of access tracks to the apiary industry. The Sunraysia Apiarists 

Association was particularly critical of the closure of access tracks in logging 

areas: 

There seems to be a practice, especially in logging areas, of closing a number of 

tracks. This is not good as it inhibits fire fighting access and prevents a safe means 

of exit in times of danger. Several apiarists have come across burnt out trees that 

have fallen across tracks, completely blocking them for lengthy periods of time. 513 

The Victorian Apiarists Association (VAA) suggested the construction and/or 

reopening of “strategically located grids of access tracks”, including in 

national parks, for fire management purposes. The VAA stated that while it 

appreciated the important values of nature conservation in such areas: 

…access to remote regions in fire emergencies would deliver overall community 

benefit if it meant nipping potential wildfire events in the bud, in doing so avoiding the 

sort of trauma experienced when fires developed into major events. 514 

The VAA also emphasised that the primary value of maintaining such a grid 

of tracks would be its contribution to bushfire prevention, particularly 

prescribed burning operations. 515 

On the other hand, the view that there was a need for an increase in the 

number of tracks available for fire management was not universally shared 

by stakeholders. 

Mr Barry Clugston, a farmer located near Halls Gap, stated: 

Quite often we were walking in, and you could often start off on a vehicle track, then 

on a walking track, but generally the fires rarely intersected with a track and you had 

to walk in. You cannot have a mosaic of tracks across a place like the Grampians to 

cater for something like a bushfire. The point was made today that you only allow 

foxes in or motorbikes or four wheel drives that should not be there anyway, and it 

costs an enormous amount. The cost of installing a greater network of tracks in a 

140 

511 See for example: M. Dennis, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007.; Councillor R. 

MacInnes, Horsham Rural City Council, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

512 K. Higgins, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007. 

513 Sunraysia Apiarists Association, Submission, no. 220, 19 June 2007, p. 1. 

514 Victorian Apiarists Association, Submission, no. 191, 5 June 2007, p. 4. 

515 Victorian Apiarists Association, Submission, no. 191, 5 June 2007, p. 3.

RSCH.016.001.0383 


place like this would be greater than its benefit. You are better off to wait for the fire 

and then have your machinery and crews ready. We can readily walk in or grab a 

helicopter and drop in. They are the few points I wanted to make, Acting Chair. I am 

happy to answer questions if you have got any. 516 

This view was shared by Mr Mike Stevens, who also stated that there was 

no need for an increase in access tracks in the Grampians region: 

The Grampians has over 800 kilometres of tracks already, quite an extensive track 

network, which is a legacy of the old forest management days. Any more tracks 

would be just ridiculous. 517 

Stakeholders also referred to the fact that some tracks were unsuitable for 

larger fire vehicles. Mr Kevin Erwin, a representative of Volunteer Fire 

Brigades Victoria, referred the Committee to the apparent disparity between 

some track widths and fire-fighting vehicles: 

The tracks and firebreaks need to take into consideration the clearance factors for 

CFA vehicles, as previously done by forestry industries — for example, a Halls Gap 

tanker, a typical appliance for the CFA, holds 3000 litres of water, is a four wheel 

drive, and needs a clearance height of at least 2.8 metres and a clearance width of 3 

metres. 518 

This point was also made by Mr Anthony Heard of Grampians Asset 

Protection: 

We feel that tracks are not wide enough. Fire trucks have trouble getting down tracks 

to fight fires as a first attack, and there are not enough turnaround points. A lot of 

times fire trucks have to go down a track, but there is nowhere for them to turn 

around, then they have to back up, which is a dangerous practice. There is a chance 

of leaving firefighters trapped without the ability to turn around. 519 

A related safety concern regarding access tracks was that of an insufficient 

number of turning bays for larger vehicles. This issue was illustrated by 

Kenneth Baxter as follows: 

I would suggest that you have a lend of a 3000 litre tanker and go for a drive up the 

mountain tracks yourself and put yourself in a position where it is full of smoke and 

you cannot really see where you are going and somebody says, ‘We’ve got to get 

out’. What do you do? Reverse 5 kilometres down the track? If there is nowhere to 

turn around, that is the only option. They have to be wide enough and they have to 

have turnarounds if you are going to use 3000 litre tankers in the bush. 520 

On the other hand, the Committee notes that DSE maintains a range of 

different sized tracks, for a range of different purposes in addition to fire 

protection, including: 

• hardwood production; 

• recreation; 

516 B. Clugston, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

517 M. Stevens, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

518 K. Erwin, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

519 A. Heard, Grampians Asset Protection, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 4 July 2007. 

520 K. Baxter, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

141

RSCH.016.001.0384 


• conservation area access; 

• softwood production; and 

• private access. 521 

In other words, a significant proportion of public land access tracks are not 

intended for use in fire suppression operations. The Committee also notes 

that although it may be ideal for all tracks to have the necessary width and 

number of turning bays to accommodate large fire tankers, this is neither 

feasible nor affordable given the extent of the track network, which amounts 

to approximately 40,000 kilometres of roads and tracks on public land, 

including 26,000 kilometres in State forest and 14,000 kilometres in national 

parks. 522 

This was acknowledged by Mr Russell Rees, Chief Officer, Country Fire 

Authority, who noted that different tracks are suited to different types of fire 

suppression vehicle and emphasised the importance of collaboration 

between CFA and DSE to ensure that this knowledge is available at the time 

of deployment: 

The message we get from our people, very loud and clear, is that they know that if 

there is a fire close and adjacent to them, as in on the public land near a CFA 

brigade, they are fully prepared to go and put that fire out. What they would desire, 

and what we are working together with DSE to do, is that they not only have access 

but they have the right type of vehicle to be able to do that. Generally speaking, 

some of the big CFA trucks are not quite as suitable as a smaller vehicle to go into 

the bush to deal with that, and that is that partnering that we are working on DSE to 

do. 523 

The Committee also notes the evidence regarding the vital importance of 

“slip-on” units (smaller four wheel drive vehicles with a flat tray to which a 

water tank can be readily fitted as needed) as the primary means of utilising 

access tracks to reach fires on public land, in contrast to tankers which are 

often effectively used as water points for such units. This is reflected in the 

relative numbers of the two kinds of vehicles. For example, in the Gippsland 

Fire District, DSE currently maintains 100 slip-on units and 18 tankers. 524 

A number of stakeholders emphasised the importance of slip-on units during 

fire suppression. For example, Mr Michael Dennis stated: 

These slip on units are most important because they get into places where big trucks 

do not. They are mobile, and they are quickly filled and quickly manipulated. 525 

Several stakeholders also called for an increase in the number of slip-on 

units. For example, Mr Kenneth Baxter asserted: 

142 

521 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Forest Management Plan for Gippsland, 



523 R. Rees, Chief Officer, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 4 June 2007. 

524 N. Penrose, Regional Director, Gippsland, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007. 

525 M. Dennis, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0385 


The other thing with smaller vehicles like slip ons is that I do not think the CFA as a 

whole has anywhere near enough slip ons or small tankers. They are much easier to 

crew. There are lots of times when you put five people on a truck, they go away and 

they cart water for DSE slip ons. … If we had more slip on units we could perhaps 

send two people away on a slip on instead of sending five away in a tanker, or a 

smaller tanker that only needs three crew. There would be flexibility there that would 

make it a lot easier… 526 

A number of stakeholders were also critical of the standard of access track 

and road signage on public land, noting the absence of signs in many cases 

and the problem of signs which were unable to withstand bushfires. 527 

Mr Russell Rees, Chief Officer, Country Fire Authority, also noted the 

increased potential for bushfires, due to arson and carelessness, associated 

with increases in the network of publicly accessible roads and tracks: 

An issue to us, of course, is that the more you have the tracks open, the more you 

invite other people who are not necessarily the type of people you want in the forest 

— and I call deliberate fire lighters an example, or careless people — so there is a 

very delicate balancing act between having tracks that are open for general public 

access versus tracks that are available for firefighters to use to get there, and that is 

a critical question for us. 528 

A number of stakeholders were critical of the rehabilitation of fire tracks by 

DSE and its partner agencies, which typically involves covering tracks with 

logs and encouraging revegetation. There are two circumstances in which 

this occurs: the rehabilitation of tracks which were constructed during fire 

suppression; and the rehabilitation of tracks which have been assessed as 

no longer required for fire management. The general concern with respect to 

this issue was expressed by Ms Heather McIntyre, Communications Officer, 

Victoria Valley Rural Fire Brigade, as follows: 

Fire tracks — please do not rejuvenate them. We are pleading, because the next 

time there is a fire there they will have to bring the bulldozers in so that they can 

open them up again for the fire trucks. We have a four wheel drive fire truck. It is a 

fairly big, cumbersome thing to get around. No way can you turn those things in a 

very small area, so it becomes a safety factor, and I know that has been mentioned 

today. If we had permanent, well defined fire track areas that the locals know, there 

would also be a safety factor there; they would know where they are going. 

Sometimes you go into these places at night time. If you go into an area at night and 

you do not know the track, and it is fairly overgrown and is fairly rough, you have a 

safety factor with your crews. 529 

526 K. Baxter, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

527 Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Submission, no. 178, 31 May 2007, p. 9. 


529 H. McIntyre, Member, Victoria Valley Fire Brigade, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 4 July 2007. 

143

RSCH.016.001.0386 


Mr Ben Rankin, DSE, confirmed that it would be necessary to regrade such 

rehabilitated tracks if they were needed during subsequent fire suppression 

operations. 530 However, Mr David Tainsh, DSE, explained the rationale for 

such rehabilitation as follows: 

The work that we are currently doing in the planning scheme is to get a strategic network up so 

that in fact the likely fire control tracks that we might use are either already in place or easily put 

into place. On the rehabilitation of those tracks, they would therefore be rehabilitated to the 

network prescribed. … [during the recent fires] we had to get in pretty quickly on 1500 

kilometres of control line and try and install good rehabilitation measures to stabilise the soil 

before we got a major flood event. Of course we did. Of the 1500 kilometres, without a good 

network prescribed, basically we were blocking off all existing roads and tracks if we did not 

immediately need them for the future. 531 

The submission provided by DSE and its partner agencies explained the 

role of the road and track network as follows: 

Roads and tracks have a number of functions from a fire management perspective. 

They provide access to ground crews for the management of both planned and 

unplanned fires. They define blocks for prescribed burning, and from the edge of 

back burning and burning out operations during wildfires. Some form the basis of 

strategic firebreaks. They are, in many cases, multiple-use assets, maintained for 

park management, forest operations, water catchment management and recreational 

and public use. 532 

Mr Ian Voigt, Regional Manager, South West, DSE, also emphasised the 

need for prioritisation by DSE in deciding which tracks should be maintained 

for fire access: 

We have a program of maintaining those on a priority basis, fitted in with the planning 

we have done. There will be a greater need in areas where we will be doing fuel 

reduction burning in a particular year to have some of those updated, and we always 

do that immediately, making sure of all of our tracks in and around areas proposed 

for work. So we have a large network of permanently established lines throughout 

the Grampians and other areas. 533 

The Committee was also informed that DSE is currently preparing a Road 

Management Plan to facilitate the assessment of the network for the various 

uses that will be required of it into the future. 534 

Mr David Tainsh, DSE, also emphasised the importance placed by DSE on 

integrating the access track network with the strategic fire break network as 

part of the process of determining which tracks would be retained 

permanently and which would be rehabilitated. 

144 

530 B. Rankin, Senior Fire Management Officer, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 November 2007. 




533 I. Voigt, Regional Manager, South West, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript 

of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 


of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0387 


Our strategic firebreak network will identify those that we will retain, those we will 

keep in place and not have to go and revisit. That is what Ben said before: there 

were two occasions when we have gone in and rehabilitated stuff that we should 

perhaps have kept open. 535 

Finally, the Committee is mindful of the fact that much of Victoria’s existing 

road and track network was established in an “unplanned and incremental” 

way with the result that the “main thrust of present roading programs is to 

rationalise and consolidate access within the forest”. 536 In addition, the Code 

of Practice and the various Forest Management Plans all now recognise the 

importance of planning, constructing, maintaining and, where necessary, 

closing roads for environmental purposes, including the preservation of 

water quality and the control of exotic flora and fauna. 

These impacts were expressed in CSIRO’s submission as follows: 

Roads, trails and firebreaks are a major source of pollution. It is widely recognised 

that roads, tracks and firebreaks are a major source of pollution to streams in 

forested catchments (Croke and Hairsine 2006). Runoff from these areas of bare soil 

may connect into streams resulting in elevated turbidity and other pollutant 

concentrations. During major bushfires these sources are likely to be increased in 

their erosive rate because of the removal of litter cover, increased traffic on road and 

tracks and in some instances the creation of new firebreaks. To mitigate these 

effects these areas need to be engineered to safely disperse runoff. Most codes of 

forest practice provide guidelines for such engineering. During the 2003 fires in south 

east Australia, many hundreds of kilometres of new firebreaks and trails were 

constructed during fire suppression operations. Until remedial action was taken, 

these areas of bare ground had a large potential to be the source of sediment and 

nutrient to streams and rivers. 537 

The challenge of maintaining an extensive and accessible network of access 

tracks while preserving the environmental values noted above, is expressed 

in the Code as follows: 

New or upgraded roads are to be designed to a standard capable of carrying 

anticipated traffic with reasonable safety, and ensuring the protection of water quality 

and river health, biodiversity conservation values, and Aboriginal cultural heritage. 538 

Finally, the Committee notes that it is a mandatory action under the Code of 

Practice for Timber Production that: 

Roads no longer required for timber harvesting or other purposes, such as fire 

management, must be permanently closed and effectively drained. 539 



536 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Chapter 10 FOREST ROADS ', viewed 19 June 

2008, . 


538 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Code of Practice for Timber Production 2007, 




145

RSCH.016.001.0388 


Conclusion 

The Committee welcomes DSE’s announcement of the preparation of a 

Road Management Plan. If such a plan is prepared with an adequate level 

of community engagement, the Committee believes it is likely to have 

significant potential to enhance the management of the road and track 

network. The Committee is particularly concerned by the evidence of 

inappropriate roads being used for fire tanker access of a lack of turning 

points for larger CFA vehicles and considers that these issues should be 

addressed through the Fire Management Plan process. Finally, the 

Committee is mindful that the maintenance of a fire access track network will 

always require a balance between the provision of public access on the one 

hand and the environmental and financial costs on the other. 

Fire breaks and containment lines 

Introduction 

This section addresses the Inquiry’s sixth term of reference, which asks the 

Committee to consider the effectiveness of maintaining permanent, 

strategically placed fire breaks and containment lines on public land areas. 

A fire break is the most general of a number of terms used to describe a 

natural or constructed barrier or impediment to the spread of a bushfire. The 

Esplin Report contains the following relevant definitions: 

• Fire Break – “any natural or constructed discontinuity in a fuel bed 

that may be used to segregate, stop and control the spread of a fire, 

or to provide a fire control line from which to suppress a fire. See also 

Fire Control Line and Fuel Break”; 540 

• Fuel Break – “a strip of land (not including areas subject to broad 

area prescribed burning) where vegetation has been removed”; and 

• Fire Control Line – “a natural or constructed barrier, or treated fire 

edge, used in fire suppression and prescribed burning to limit/prevent 

the spread of fire”. 541 

The Committee notes that the terms “fire break” and “fuel break” are often 

used interchangeably and that although term of reference number six refers 

to fire breaks, technically speaking, it is in fact concerned with fuel breaks as 

defined above. 542 DSE also refers to fuel breaks in describing the network 

of cleared vegetation that is currently under construction in Melbourne’s 

146 




Department of Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne, 2003, pp. 324, 328. 

542 See for example the definition of a fire break at: Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'A- 

Z Guide', viewed 12 June 2008, .

RSCH.016.001.0389 


catchments. However, since stakeholders almost universally referred to fire 

breaks rather than to fuel breaks, and for the sake of consistency with the 

term of reference under consideration, the Committee has adopted the 

former term in this section. 

A “containment line” is synonymous with a “fire control line” as defined 

above. 543 The Committee uses the former term in this section, again for the 

sake of consistency with the term of reference. However, readers are 

advised that many stakeholders used this term interchangeably with each of 

the definitions provided above, reflecting the fact that firebreaks are often 

used as containment lines during major bushfire suppression operations. 

Finally, the Committee notes that fire breaks and containment lines are also 

often used as vehicle access tracks during fire suppression to provide 

access for ground-based fire-fighting machinery such as bulldozers, slip-on 

units, and tankers. 


As noted above, stakeholders were broadly divided on the effectiveness of 

permanent and strategically placed fire breaks and containment lines 

throughout public land. A number of stakeholders also expressed concerns 

regarding the financial cost of firebreak construction and maintenance and 

the potential impacts on the environment and water quality. 

DSE explained the rationale for the construction of permanent firebreaks as 

follows: 

Firebreaks support detection, patrol, initial attack, and ongoing suppression. Under 

higher degree fire danger conditions, well located firebreaks assist with containing 

the lateral fire spread rather than preventing the forward spread. They define blocks 

for prescribed burning, and form the edge for back-burning and burning-out 

operations during wildfires. They are, in many cases, multiple-use assets that are 

part of an overall asset network maintained for park management, forest operations, 

water catchment management and recreational and public use. 544 

DSE informed the Committee that it maintains a variety of fire break widths, 

according to location and anticipated purpose, and that these fire breaks are 

also used to support prescribed burning operations: 

Strategic breaks may range from a single vehicle track as narrow as two to three 

blade widths (6 to 10 m) which may need to be upgraded prior to use, through to 40 

m wide tracks with a fully or partially cleared fuel reduced zones on either side. Fuel 

reduction may be achieved [in association with breaks] through prescribed burning or 

physical treatments such as over-story removal and slashing or mulching. 545 

543 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Fire Management: Glossary of Fire Terminology, 




147

RSCH.016.001.0390 


DSE referred the Committee to the example of a fire break located in the 

Wallaby Creek Water Catchment north of Kinglake (one of Melbourne’s 

water catchments) which proved effective in the control of a fire in February 

2007 and which effectively allowed resources to be deployed to five other 

fires that were burning in the area at the time. 546 

The Emergency Services Commissioner expressed strong support for the 

effectiveness of fire breaks. The Commissioner referred to a review of major 

fires in Australia between 1939 and 1994, which found that although the 

inherent effectiveness of firebreaks in suppressing bushfires declines with 

increasing fire intensity, this is offset by the important role that firebreaks 

serve as containment lines during the suppression of major bushfires: 

The probability of a firebreak stopping a fire decreases with increasing fire 

intensity…studies of the 1977 Western District fires…observed that almost without 

exception, the firebreak system failed to have any influence on the suppression of 

fires during the period of their major run. However, it was also noted that firebreaks 

could be effective by providing control lines to enable fire fighters to stop side spread 

of major fires to undertake tactical fuel reduction works ahead of a bushfire. 547 

The Commissioner also stated that firebreaks assist in the initial/rapid attack 

on fires and in the protection of vulnerable communities and assets, 

including water catchments, gas, electricity and fuel supply lines. 548 

The importance of fire breaks as containment lines during major bushfire 

operations was also emphasised by Mr Ewan Waller, DSE: 

It was always accepted that they would never stop the run of a wildfire. The intent of 

a firebreak was never that. Particularly with eucalypts, it will be spotted over the 

break well before and on that type of day. They may be okay on a flanking fire, when 

the fire is not coming directly at a firebreak, but it was never the intent. The intent 

was partly about access, partly about safety. The firefighters work off there if they are 

back burning — it gives you a safety in back burning. 549 

Other land and fire management agencies and organisations who expressed 

support for the maintenance of permanent fire breaks and containment lines 

included: 

• the Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria – who, like a number of other 

stakeholders, emphasised the importance of planning the fire break 

network in accordance with the Integrated Fire Management Planning 

(IFMP) framework outlined in Chapter Two; 

• the Victoria State Emergency Service; and 

• the Australasian Assembly of Volunteer Fire Brigade Associations 

Inc.. 

148 


547 Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Submission, no. 143, 28 May 2007, pp. 18-19. 

References omitted. 

548 Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Submission, no. 143, 28 May 2007, p. 18. 


Environment, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0391 


A significant number of stakeholders from outside the land and fire 

management agencies expressed strong support for the construction of 

permanent fire breaks and containment lines as a bushfire mitigation 

strategy. A number of these stakeholders also expressed the view that there 

is a clear case for an increase in the network of major and permanent 

firebreaks across public land and were critical of the practice of revegetating 

firebreaks constructed during bushfire operations. Stakeholders within this 

broad category included: 

• the Victorian Farmers Federation; 

• the Friends of Howqua Hills; 

• various City and Shire Councils – although a number of these 

emphasised the importance of integrated planning regarding the 

placement of fire breaks, while the Shire of Yarra Ranges was critical 

of the environmental assessment processes which preceded the 

commencement of work on the firebreaks around the catchments 

east of Melbourne; 550 

• Timber Communities Australia; 

• the Victorian Apiarists Association; and 

• the North East Deerstalkers Association. 

Conversely, the Catchment Management Authorities who provided evidence 

to the Committee were generally critical of the effectiveness of large 

permanent firebreaks and noted the potential impact on water quality. North 

Central Catchment Management Authority (NCCMA) was critical of the 

effectiveness of some fire breaks and control lines and suggested that their 

inability to contain wildfires had been proven. 551 The West Gippsland 

Catchment Management Authority (WGCMA) stated that it is not possible to 

maintain effective fire breaks in mountainous country and expressed 

concern regarding previous efforts to do so. WGCMA also stated that 

bushfires frequently jump across breaks by spotting hundreds of metres 

ahead of the fire front. 552 

A number of stakeholders from outside the land and fire management 

agencies also suggested that fire breaks and containment lines contributed 

little, if at all, to the suppression of large bushfires. These stakeholders 

generally questioned the need for firebreaks and containment lines 

throughout public land, in some cases stating that such infrastructure should 

be restricted to the interface between public and private land. Some of these 

stakeholders also referred to the environmental issues associated with 

firebreaks, particularly the capacity for breaks to serve as vectors for feral 

550 Shire of Yarra Ranges, Submission, no. 180, 1 June 2007, p. 3. 

551 North Central Catchment Management Authority, Submission, no. 185, 4 June 2007, p. 2. 

552 West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority, Submission, no. 135, 28 May 2007, p. 2. 

149

RSCH.016.001.0392 


animals and weed invasion. Stakeholders within this broad category 

included: 

• the Bushfire Front Inc.; 

• the Institute of Foresters of Australia; 

• Forest Fire Victoria; 

• East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce (EGWT) – who stated that fire 

breaks are “useless” in a major fire but useful for fuel reduction 

burns; 553 

• Environment East Gippsland; 

• the Wilderness Society; 

• Goongerah Environment Council; 

• Victorian National Parks Association Inc.; 

• Friends of Bass Valley Bush Inc. Landcare Group; 

• the Gippsland Environment Group; 

• Bushwalking Victoria; 

• Hamilton Field Naturalist Club; and 

• Wombat Forestcare. 

In its submission to the Inquiry, CSIRO supported the effectiveness of fire 

breaks but noted the importance of combining fire breaks with prescribed 

burning in forested areas: 

Fire breaks are most effective against grass fires but they are less effective where 

wooded or forested areas abut the break. Here, firebreaks need to be combined with 

protective burning along the firebreak sufficient to prevent wildfires spotting over the 

breaks. Fuel management on the upwind side of the fire break will reduce firebrand 

production by the wildfire, plus reduce fire intensity and potential lofting height 

(firebrand transport distance). Fuel management downwind of the break will reduce 

the probability of spot fire ignitions from firebrands. 

… 

High-intensity wildfires will note be stopped form escaping or entering an area, even 

by significant firebreaks. That does not mean they do not add to the overall level of 

protection given to an area, but it does mean that care is required when their 

effectiveness in a major wildfire situation is being considered. 554 

150 


554 CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Submission, no. 166, 31 May 2007, p. 24.

RSCH.016.001.0393 


CSIRO also stated fire breaks have a number of limitations, including: 

• They are generally not wide enough to be effective against a high-intensity 

fire which is throwing spotfires; 

• They channel the wind flow along the firebreak and cause severe 

turbulence on the edge of the forest. This often results in a fire increasing in 

intensity as it approaches the firebreak and increases the chance of 

spotfires being thrown across the firebreak; and 

• Wide firebreaks have high maintenance costs. 555 

On balance, the Committee agrees with the CSIRO, DSE and other 

stakeholder organisations referred to above that fire breaks have an 

important role to play as part of the overall bushfire suppression 

infrastructure on public land. 

As noted above, a number of stakeholders were critical of the practice of 

revegetating fire breaks that are constructed during fire operations. 

The importance of such revegetation in catchment areas was explained by 

Mr Gary Harper, Manager, Assets, Grampians Wimmera Mallee Water, as 

follows: 

Some members of the public may see the firebreaks or whatever as an access track 

and may come into areas and carry out activities that may lead to erosion and so on, 

so there is a need to revegetate those areas and limit public access to normal 

activities in a national park rather than four wheel driving … 556 

DSE also stated that the revegetation of some fire breaks constructed during 

suppression operations is necessary both to prevent erosion and to 

maximise the strategic value of the fire break network: 

It is not possible for fire control lines and breaks constructed for direct attack and 

back burning to be properly formed with adequate drainage lines during fire 

suppressions operations. Because of this, many of the 2006/07 firelines and breaks 

have been initially breached and stabilised to reduce run-off and erosion should 

drought-breaking rains occur. Those that contribute to strategic fire protection 

requirements will be identified, retained and enhanced to meet necessary standards. 

High priority construction and upgrading of these and other breaks will be achieved 

through DSE’s Fire Operations Planning process. 557 

On balance, the Committee supports the revegetation and rehabilitation of 

some fire breaks following bushfire suppression but is also mindful of the 

concerns raised by a number of stakeholders in this regard. The Committee 

considers, however, that the IFMP framework, discussed in Chapter Six, is 

likely to improve the level of community input into the revegetation of fire 

breaks and provides communities with a greater say in determining which 

breaks remain open. 


556 G. Harper, Manager, Assets, Grampians Wimmera Mallee Water, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 

4 July 2007. 


151

RSCH.016.001.0394 


Finally, the Committee is mindful of the opposition to the current 

construction of a 600 kilometre network of fire breaks in key Melbourne 

water catchments, including the view that this project is unlikely to be 

effective as a bushfire mitigation strategy. 558 While the Committee 

acknowledges the concern that firebreaks may be generally less effective in 

Mountain and Alpine ash forests, 559 it considers that the network is likely to 

play a significant role in augmenting the suite of fire prevention and 

suppression strategies and tools available to land and fire management 

agencies. The network is likely to be of particular value in the conduct of 

prescribed burning and in enhancing the rapid attack capacity of agencies, 

which is discussed further below. 

Large water points 

The Committee received a range of evidence regarding the provision and 

maintenance of large water points on public land to assist with the aerial 

suppression of bushfires. 

The importance of such water points was almost universally acknowledged 

by stakeholders, who typically noted that water points reduce fire-fighting 

turn around times for both aircraft and ground-based crew, thereby 

maximising the time spent at the fire edge. 560 

DSE informed the Committee that it maintains a network of approximately 

2,200 water points on public land and at its fixed winged airbases, while 

CFA also maintains water access at many of its stations. DSE also informed 

the Committee that the Government had recently allocated $3 million 

towards the upgrade of 220 priority sites throughout Victoria. 561 DSE 

informed the Committee that the upgrade program followed a consultation 

process which was guided by local steering committees comprising 

representatives from Rural Water Authorities, Local Government, DSE, DPI, 

CFA, VFF and CMA. 

A number of stakeholders were critical of the number and condition of large 

water points currently sited on public land. The submission provided by the 

Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) encapsulated these concerns as 

follows: 

Authorities responsible for management of public lands have actively 

decommissioned dams on public land, reducing water resources available for fighting 

fires. 

Authorities responsible for monitoring the storage of water must recognise the 

importance of reliable water storage for fighting fires. 

152 

558 See for example: Dr. K. Tolhurst, Submission, no. 137, 28 May 2007, p. 5.; Professor D. 

Lindenmayer, Submission, no. 115, 25 May 2007, pp. 2-3. 

559 Professor D. Lindenmayer, Submission, no. 115, 25 May 2007, p. 2. 

560 See for example: CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Submission, no. 166, 31 May 2007, p. 26. 

561 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, p. 21.

RSCH.016.001.0395 


The states fire response relies heavily on water points situated on private land. The 

government’s policy of reimbursing landholders for water taken ensures landholders 

continue to make water available. The VFF believe this policy must be maintained 

into the future. 

Restrictions on the development of farm dams has reduced the availability of water 

and subsequently weakened Victoria’s fire preparedness. Farm dams play an 

important role in helping individual landholders protect their own assets during fire 

events. 562 

VFF went on to recommend that, where necessary, public land managers 

seek to re-commission previous water storages and establish new water 

storages on crown land. In addition VFF recommended that authorities 

responsible for regulating the establishment of private dams should take into 

consideration the need for water points in fire fighting efforts. 563 

On the other hand, WGCMA stated that it does not support the construction 

of additional water points because water supplies in most catchments are 

now fully allocated to consumption needs. WGCMA also stated that it had 

undertaken environmental flow studies for many waterways and that all 

studies to date had identified the need to recover water from existing users 

to attain a minimum level of environmental function. WGCMA concluded that 

the construction of further storages would only exacerbate this issue. 564 

Like the VFF, a number of stakeholders were critical of instances where the 

Government had decided not to replace water taken from some domestic 

supplies during recent fire suppression operations. 565 The submission 

provided by DSE and its partner agencies outlined the Government’s policy 

during 2006/07 in this regard as follows: 

The Government established a policy for 2006/07 that, in the event of a fire, 

regardless of where it starts, water taken from domestic and stock or irrigation dams 

or water needed for essential (not all) use by the community will be replaced. 566 

The Committee considers that DSE and its partner agencies have 

established appropriately consultative and effective arrangements for the 

provision and maintenance of large water points on public land. The 

Committee appreciates the concerns of those stakeholders who were critical 

of the extent to which DSE utilised privately owned water supplies during 

recent fires but considers that these concerns would be best addressed by 

extending the Government's 2006/07 water replacement policy. 

562 Victorian Farmers Federation, Submission, no. 112, 25 May 2007, p. 7. 

563 Victorian Farmers Federation, Submission, no. 112, 25 May 2007, p. 7. 


565 See for example: P. Siddle, Submission, no. 53, 11 May 2007, pp. 1-2.; Councillor B. Flowers, 

Mayor, Murrindindi Shire Council, Transcript of evidence, King Lake, 18 June 2007. 


153

RSCH.016.001.0396 



That the Victorian Government replace or compensate for water taken from 

domestic, stock and irrigation dams, or water needed for essential use, in the 

event of a fire, regardless of where the bushfire starts. 

Other suppression resources 

Aerial Resources 

As with firebreaks, and the other land based elements of Victoria's bushfire 

suppression infrastructure outlined in the preceding section of this chapter, 

DSE's capacity to mobilise a fleet of aircraft is an important element in the 

detection, patrol, initial attack, and ongoing suppression of bushfires. 

Coupled with emerging remote sensing technologies, and traditional 

methods of visual detection provided by a well-planned network of 

firetowers, aircraft are an increasingly important component within the 

overall asset network maintained by DSE and its partner agencies for both 

bushfire suppression and prevention. 

Since their use in Victorian fire management operations in 1925, aircraft 

have come to play an increasingly valuable role in Victorian fire suppression 

activities, with aircraft used for both rapid attack and campaign fire functions. 

In 2006/07, the State Aircraft Unit ◊ (SAU) had 32 aircraft under long term 

contract available for fire operations, two more than the previous year. As 

shown in Table 4.1, flying time for fire related activities also increased 

dramatically from previous years, with DSE logging over 6,000 flight hours 

for fire related activities. 

Table 4.1: State Aircraft Unit Flying Times. 567 

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 

DSE – Fire 4,648 968 1,717 2,516 6,748 

CFA - Fire 462 207 187 609 736 

Other ∗ 734 771 1,101 1,640 1,242 

TOTAL 5,844 1,946 3,005 4,765 8,726 

◊ The State Aircraft Unit (SAU) coordinates, manages and delivers a wide range of aviation related 

services on behalf of the DSE and CFA through the Joint Agencies Aviation Program. 

567 

State Aircraft Unit Victoria, 'Annual Report 2006/07', viewed 18 June 2008, 

. 

∗ Includes DSE/CFA/DPI/PV and SAU non fire related operations such as training and locust control 

154

RSCH.016.001.0397 


The SAU also manages the rappel and hover exit programs on behalf of 

DSE. In 2006/07 there were 53 deployments of rappel crews, the second 

highest since the program commenced in 1985. 568 

The aircraft contracted to the SAU include fixed winged bombers, 

helicopters, infra-red linescan aircraft and light fixed wing reconnaissance 

aircraft. 569 Each of these aircraft have different capabilities and as such are 

used in a range of differing situations. For example, as noted by Mr J. 

Cayley at the Dunkeld Public Hearing, the Elvis water-bombing helicopter 

has proven to be successful for attacking fires in bushland, but more 

specialised aircraft are needed for rapid attack. 570 

While the use of aircraft for fire suppression in Victoria was noted by Mr 

Richard Alder, National Aerial Firefighting Centre, as an example of best 

practice in the field, several witnesses questioned their management and 

use. 571 Indeed, Mr Ewan Waller, DSE, at the Bairnsdale Public Hearing 

noted that DSE could improve its public land management by the use of 

more aircraft, though it is unclear whether he was referring to a quantum 

increase or simply a change in the way in which aircraft are currently utilised 

by the Department: 

Also on targets, when you ask whether it is a resourcing issue, it is too easy to just 

dump on resourcing. I think one thing we are looking at is efficiencies. I reckon we 

can get a lot more efficient, using more aircraft than people on the ground maybe, 

and some of the freeing up of how we are ensuring we have the community onside 

more than we have right now, and buying in right across the board. If we do that we 

actually can burn bigger areas and use aircraft more. 572 

A number of witnesses noted the importance and necessity of aircraft use, 

particularly for rapid attack. For example, Mr Phil Whiteman of Grandridge 

Plantations argued that an aerial resource should be deployed as soon as 

smoke is detected, stating: 

Really it is about having many more smaller and cheaper aerial firefighting units. The 

key, though, is for them to be based regionally and under the immediate dispatch of 

DSE and CFA in the regions. I will expand a little bit on that. 

The current situation that I have seen is pretty much in line with what I have written 

there at the top. The smoke is detected, and that could be from any source. We send 

ground crews to it. They find the fire; sometimes that takes hours — usually not, but 

sometimes it does. The crews report. Sometimes they get it out, sometimes they do 

not. The fire is not controlled, it is getting bad, call in the aerial resources through the 

centrally controlled system which considers statewide and even national priorities. 

568 

State Aircraft Unit Victoria, 'Annual Report 2006/07', viewed 18 June 2008, 

. 

569 

State Aircraft Unit Victoria, 'State Aircraft Unit', viewed 18 June 2008, 

. 

570 J. Cayley, President, Hamilton Field Naturalists, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 4 July 2007. 

571 R. Alder, General Manager, National Aerial Firefighting Centre, National Aerial Firefighting Centre 

and Australasian Fire Authority Council, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 19 November 2007. 



155

RSCH.016.001.0398 


The alternative that we are much more keen on is this one: smoke detect it, send an 

aerial resource straightaway, pinpoint the location and the situation, drop the foam, 

phoscheck, and keep it as a small fire. That is really the key that we see. Once it is a 

big fire, we are really under the control of the weather. We can make some small 

impacts on the fire, but really the wind and the weather dominate what happens after 

that. 573 

Mr Peter Watkinson, Regional Director, Port Phillip, DSE, agreed with Mr 

Whiteman on the importance of a rapid response though noted that “flights 

are routinely conducted following dry lightning events”. 574 

Several witnesses also noted the difficulties in obtaining aircraft. For 

example Mr Bernard Barbetti, Regional Fire Manger, Port Philip, DSE, noted 

difficulties in sharing resources at peak times: 

The balance between response resources is a difficult question. You need to have a 

strong initial attack because you can then get on top of many small fires quickly, and 

last year we dealt with a series of nine lightning strikes on the same day that the 

Yarra Junction fire took off. Our argument to Melbourne Water a few years ago was 

that we had the alpine fire running and we had all our aircraft resources tied up: there 

was really nothing left to allocate to Melbourne's catchments. So if Melbourne Water 

could contribute, that would shore up an aerial firefighting appliance just for the 

catchments and change the balance a bit. 575 

Expressing similar concerns regarding the availability of aircraft during large 

fire events, Mr Graham Symons, Omeo Brigade Captain, CFA, stated: 

I think from our point of view it is the difficulty in actually getting the aircraft. The 

times when they could have flown may have been first thing in the morning when 

there was not a lot of smoke going on, because they were constrained to maybe 

8 hours or whatever. The 8 hours might be from 12 o’clock to 6 o’clock or whatever it 

might have been. When they could have been up first thing in the morning, it was 

probably not utilised in areas where they maybe could have had a look to see what 

the fire was doing. 

The problem seems to be trying to get that aircraft. I think in the 2003 campaign in 

the Omeo division we probably had four drops of phos-check, and one of them was 

dropped because he was going back because it was getting dark. We did not see a 

lot of aircraft activity, whereas I think in 2007 it was probably utilised a lot more and 

they probably did a lot greater job. We probably did not acknowledge the aircraft in 

2006–07 as much as we should have, because they really did a good job. But I think 

in 2003 we struggled to actually get the aircraft. Even out at Benambra, which is 

where the air base was situated, just for them to get it up to do aerial bombing was 

pretty difficult. I think we just need more. 576 

156 

573 P. Whiteman, Planning Manager, Grand Ridge Plantations, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 

August 2007. 

574 P. Watkinson, Regional Manager Port Phillip, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Transcript of evidence, Warburton, 8 October 2007. 

575 B. Barbetti, Regional Fire Manager Port Phillip, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 


576 G. Symons, Captain, Omeo Brigade, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 

November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0399 


Mr Gavin Hope echoed the concerns of Mr Symons, informing the 

Committee that: 

It is just that the smoke and the line-scanning was very valuable at night-time, but I 

think there were some difficulties at times with getting those aircraft or the equipment 

that had to come from New South Wales to come down to Victoria, so there was a bit 

of a delay occasionally in getting those line-scans in to where the fire actually was. 577 

While not explicitly identifying a lack of aircraft an issue, Mr Peter 

Watkinson, DSE informed the Committee that in addition to the aircraft 

operated by the SAU, the “region contracts fixed-wing reconnaissance 

aircraft to assist the fire towers locate fires caused by lightning”. 578 

While most witnesses agreed that aircraft were important in fire suppression, 

witnesses also noted that aerial resources should not be viewed as a 

panacea. For example, Mr Trevor Roche informed the Committee that: 

Without ground suppression aerial suppression would generally fail, so we need to 

have that water supply available for both modes of operation. Aircraft are not the 

panacea to all of our fire suppression problems in Victoria, and asset protection 

problems must also be supported by ground crews who need water to be able to do 

their job. 579 

Expressing a similar view, Mr Richard Alder noted that: 

…it is very important that we do not become over-dependent on tools such as 

aircraft, recognising that they do have their limitations and are no substitute for 

effective prevention and preparedness measures and, in the case of aircraft, are 

effective only when used in conjunction with effective ground forces. 580 

In conclusion, the Committee considers that aircraft play an important role in 

bushfire suppression, and that DSE has effective and efficient arrangements 

in place to ensure an adequate level of deployment. While the Committee 

acknowledges recent concerns regarding the availability of aircraft at peak 

times, it considers that this was largely due to the unprecedented size of the 

fires experienced in 2002/03 and 2006/07. 

Remote sensing technology 

Bushfire suppression technology, in particular remote sensing technology, is 

a rapidly developing field and although not specifically referred to in the 

terms of reference, is a tool that may aid in suppression and prevention 

activities. 

577 G. Hope, Operations Officer, Region 11, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 


578 P. Watkinson, Regional Manager Port Phillip, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 


579 T. Roche, Project worker, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 19 


580 R. Alder, General Manager, National Aerial Firefighting Centre, National Aerial Firefighting Centre 

and Australasian Fire Authority Council, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 19 November 2007. 

157

RSCH.016.001.0400 


In relation to fire management, remote sensing refers to the science of 

acquiring information, (spectral, spatial, temporal), without coming into 

physical contact with the objects, or area, under investigation. 581 There are 

generally two types of remote-sensing technologies: 

• passive remote sensing which relies on naturally reflected or emitted 

energy of the imaged surface; and 

• active remote sensing where the sensor provides its own illumination 

and measures what comes back e.g. radar. 582 

While remote sensing technologies have a variety of applications, their use 

in fire management has increased over recent years. For example, some 

remote sensing technologies are mounted to fire towers and are able to 

detect smoke thereby providing early warning to land managers. Other 

technologies are able to utilise satellite imagery to determine bushfire impact 

on tree canopy cover or visualise flame through smoke. Importantly, remote 

sensing technologies can be applied before, during and after a fire. 

Several stakeholders noted the potential of remote sensing technologies. 

For example, at the Grampians Public Hearing, Mr Anthony Heard, 

Grampians Asset Protection, highlighted the potential importance of satellite 

technology in facilitating rapid attack: 

we need ….. infrared technology and perhaps satellite technology that could find 

these outbreaks of fire earlier, when they are smaller, so we can attack them more 

quickly before they become major fires. 583 

Similarly, Mr John Cayley, Hamilton Field Naturalists, informed the 

Committee that: 

Modern technology such as real-time satellite imagery could be used to detect points 

of ignition for specialised crews or water-bombing aircraft to be deployed. 584 

Mr Daryl Scherger informed the Committee that had early detection cameras 

been installed in the Grampians area, fires would have been detected much 

earlier. 585 

However, the Committee was also informed that while remote sensing 

technology has significant potential, it had yet to be fully proven and should 

not be viewed as a panacea. For example, Bushwalking Victoria, while 

noting that remote sensing satellites have a role to play in fire prevention 

158 

581 GIS Development, 'Remote Sensing', viewed 12 June 2008, 

. 

582 GIS Lounge, 'Remote-Sensing Technologies - Dr. Larry Smith, UCLA', viewed 11 June 2008, < 

http://gislounge.com/remote-sensing-technologies/>.; GIS Development, 'Remote Sensing', viewed 

12 June 2008, . 

583 A. Heard, Grampians Asset Protection, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 4 July 2007. 

584 J. Cayley, President, Hamilton Field Naturalists, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 4 July 2007. 

585 D. Scherger, Submission, no. 4, 20 April 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0401 


and suppression, stated that this technology is “no substitute for qualified 

DSE staff on the ground who can react quickly”. 586 

DSE informed the Committee that it recognises the potential and importance 

of developing remote sensing technologies, and that it has undertaken trials 

of certain technologies in conjunction with the Western Australia 

Government. 587 However, DSE also informed the Committee that in some 

respects, the technology is not yet cost-effective. For example, in relation to 

mapping of areas burnt, Mr Ken King informed the Committee that: 

Mapping all of the area burnt is time-consuming. At the moment remote sensing or 

doing it with the use of technology is not all that cost-effective. 588 

The Committee recognises that remote sensing technologies have the 

potential to aid in prevention, suppression and pre/post fire analysis. 

However, like other fire related infrastructure, such as aircraft and 

firebreaks, remote sensing technology should not be viewed as a panacea, 

but as an increasingly important component of a suite of bushfire 

management tools. 

586 Bushwalking Victoria, Submission, no. 65, 18 May 2007, p. 6. 

587 L. Fogarty, Assistant Chief Officer, Fire and Emergency Management, Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 2 June 2007. 


Environment, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 4 June 2007. 

159

RSCH.016.001.0402 


160

RSCH.016.001.0403 

Chapter 5: The Impact of Traditional Land Uses 

Chapter 

5 

The Impact of Traditional Land Uses 

Introduction 

The Inquiry’s eighth term of reference requires the Committee to consider 

the impact of traditional land uses on the scale and intensity of bushfires and 

on the ability of relevant agencies to respond. The reference provides a 

number of examples of traditional land uses including timber harvesting, 

grazing, four-wheel-driving, hunting, camping, and mining and prospecting. 

The impact of each of these commercial and recreational activities is 

considered in this chapter. 

The Committee recognises that there are a range of activities conducted on 

public land in Victoria that are not specifically referred to in the terms of 

reference, such as bushwalking, picnicking, horseriding and birdwatching. 

While the Committee received little evidence in relation to these activities, it 

does not consider that they have had an adverse impact on the severity of 

recent bushfires or on the ability of relevant agencies to respond. The 

Committee is also mindful that, as with the traditional land uses discussed 

below, many of these activities have been adversely affected by the recent 

bushfires. 

The Committee is also mindful that Aboriginal people practised a range of 

traditional land uses prior to the arrival of Europeans, some of which 

continue to the current day. The issue of Aboriginal land use, and its 

significance for land and fire management, is discussed in Chapter One. 

Overview of stakeholder evidence 

Introduction 

A significant number of stakeholders expressed the view that access to 

public land had been increasingly restricted over recent decades, resulting 

in a range of negative impacts on land and fire management. Impacts 

identified by stakeholders included: increased fuel loads in forested areas; 

the loss of valuable sources of local knowledge; the loss of firefighting 

experience and equipment; and a decline in the condition of, and access to, 

vehicle tracks. On the latter point, stakeholders’ concerns focused on the 

condition and right of access to management vehicle only tracks and those 

tracks currently subject to seasonal closure. 

161

RSCH.016.001.0404 


The creation of national parks and the reduction of timber harvesting in 

public native forests were the two developments most commonly cited by 

stakeholders as having contributed to the above impacts. Many 

stakeholders also expressed the view that such impacts were the cumulative 

effect of these and other public land access restrictions, including the 

restriction of grazing, four wheel driving, hunting, mining and prospecting. 

The view that public land access restrictions have adversely affected land 

and fire management in Victoria was not universally shared by stakeholders. 

Some stakeholders suggested that particular traditional land uses have 

exacerbated, and in some cases continue to exacerbate, the challenges of 

fire management on public land. These views are also outlined below. 


The view that land and fire management has been compromised by the 

cumulative impact of various public land access restrictions was expressed 

by Mr Simon Ramsay, President of the Victorian Farmers Federation. Mr 

Ramsay described traditional land users as a valuable fire management 

resource whose capacity had been under-utilised in recent years as a result 

of both their removal from fire management decision making, and the advent 

of public land access restrictions: 

The involvement of local communities is vital to Victoria’s fire response. However, 

this resource is often not fully utilised. The VFF believes there are considerable 

opportunities to utilise those engaged in traditional uses of Crown land to improve the 

standard of fire management. Groups engaged in traditional uses such as timber 

harvesting, grazing, four wheel driving, hunting, mining and prospecting by definition 

all have a strong interest in preventing bushfires on Crown land and carry a 

significant amount of practical knowledge about fire management. It is disappointing 

and unfortunate that to varying degrees traditional users of Crown land have been 

removed from the fire management decision making processes. Over time many of 

these groups have had their access to Crown land restricted by government 

authorities. As a result, these users have been disenfranchised. 589 

This view was echoed by Mr Trevor Roche, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria: 

From a fire suppression point of view it [access restrictions] disadvantages in a 

number of ways. In particular it limits access so that people who live in the 

community are no longer able to move freely within the land, and that has always 

been an important consideration in terms of them being familiar with the land. A lot of 

locals used to walk through the land or drive through the land, and when they cannot 

do that there is a disadvantage that occurs. Lack of maintenance of tracks is another 

issue. A lot of tracks are now limited in terms of the access, and past access by the 

public has always ensured that those tracks remain passable. 590 

162 


2007. 


November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0405 


Mr Mark Coleman identified the restrictions placed on traditional land uses in 

national parks in recent years, and the associated loss of land and fire 

knowledge, as an explanation for the scale and intensity of the recent 

bushfires: 

What has happened now is they have locked the whole thing up, and it is just been a 

holocaust waiting to happen. We knew it was going to happen, but we just did not 

know when. …The knowledge just seems to be gone, and what I still cannot 

understand is with the national parks, yes, we have got park rangers, but why is it 

that none of the park rangers actually reside in their national parks? …They are 

basically looking after a vast array of country, the same as the timber industry and 

the cattlemen did. They lived in those areas for generations, and they knew what was 

happening, whereas … the park rangers … are probably lucky to be there 20 hours a 

week. 591 

Mr Scott Gentle of Timber Communities Australia, stated that there is a need 

for more “active management” of national parks. Mr Gentle identified 

existing restrictions on access to national parks, and the way in which parks 

are currently managed, as particular problems for neighbouring landholders: 

Timber Communities Australia really would like to see some more active land 

management. …locking up forests is just not working. It is great to have national 

parks, but … they are just becoming … the neighbours from hell. I speak to people 

out there whose properties border on national parks, from orchardists to 

viticulturalists, and all of them say the same thing — that is, they are keeping and 

managing their land responsibly, yet they are seeing Parks Victoria not doing 

anything about things like trees just bordering their property falling over fences. … 

They are really frustrated with it. 592 

Councillor Malcolm Hole of Timber Towns Victoria, a local government 

association comprising councillors and officers from 22 rural councils, stated 

that Crown land should be available to traditional land users by virtue of its 

status as publicly-owned land: 

The matter that we would like to raise is in relation to Crown land use — that is one 

of the things — and particularly with state parks and national parks. We believe, and 

I am speaking on behalf of councils right across Victoria, that Crown land actually 

belongs to all the citizens of Victoria, and the use of those parks should be made 

available to them, regardless of whether it is selective logging or whether it is cattle in 

the high country or four wheel drives or motorbikes being allowed into that area. 593 

In common with a number of other stakeholders, Councillor Hole also 

suggested that a greater degree of access to national parks for traditional 

land uses would help to control the bushfire risk and recommended grazing, 

selective timber harvesting, and firewood collection as a means of reducing 

forest undergrowth. 594 

591 M. Coleman, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

592 S. Gentle, Victorian State Manager, Timber Communities Australia, Transcript of evidence, 

Melbourne, 16 July 2007. 

593 Councillor M. Hole, President, Timber Towns Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 

2007. 

594 Councillor M. Hole, President, Timber Towns Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 

2007. 

163

RSCH.016.001.0406 


A number of stakeholders expressed the view that the land practices 

established by the first European Victorians – such as grazing, timber 

harvesting and prescribed burning – served to regulate the fuel loads in 

forested areas and minimise the risk of large bushfires, in a similar way to 

the traditional burning practiced by pre-European Aboriginal Australians. 595 

These stakeholders suggested that increases in the frequency, scale and 

intensity of bushfires in Victoria are the result of a decline in such European 

land practices across large areas of public land. This view was articulated by 

Mr Gilbert Rothe of the East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce (EGWFT) in the 


Fire was natural prior to early settlement. The early settlers also carried on a tradition 

of mosaic burns to protect themselves, and we have had the benefit of that era with 

the harvesting of timber for the last 100 years from a very resourceful supply. Many 

thousands of people have also enjoyed the legacy within our national parks, but the 

former glory that could be appreciated is being eroded by an overgrown, inaccessible 

floor cover of debris. We acknowledge some fires will still be a problem. But if we 

reduce the fuel load available, not as much damage will occur to the flora and fauna 

of our environment. While we respect the views of the DSE, Parks Victoria et cetera, 

there is little evidence to suggest the way forward is by continuing as we have been 

for the last 35 years. 596 

As the Committee has concluded in Chapter One, there is insufficient 

evidence to determine the exact extent and regional intensity to which 

Victorian Aboriginals used fire for land management purposes prior to the 

arrival of Europeans. It is therefore difficult to assess the argument that early 

European land practices in the forested regions of Victoria, served to 

maintain pre-existing fuel loads and fire regimes. 

A significant number of stakeholders identified land use changes and 

restrictions as the reason for the decline in a range of forest workers - 

including timber industry employees and contractors, graziers, miners, 

prospectors and Government employees – who were previously available as 

a “first strike response team” in the event of bushfires. 597 

This loss of a skilled and knowledgeable workforce, with valuable 

experience in bushfire prevention and suppression was noted by many 

stakeholders. For example, Mr Bernard Young of Plantations North East 

stated that: 

There simply are not enough people who fully understand and are comfortable 

working in firefighting situations, as there would have been 20 or 30 years ago. 

… 

It has been a long term passage of time that has got us to this situation in relation to 

the levels of experience and skill that go out and work in the bush, as we call it, on a 

day to day basis, and it would take a very large effort to turn that around. I think there 

164 

595 See for example: G. Rothe, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007; H. Livingstone, 

President, Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, Transcript of evidence, 

Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007. 

596 G. Rothe, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007. 

597 MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 52, 9 May 2007, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0407 


is a need for a new approach which balances both the need for more experienced 

people working in the bush as well as, obviously, taking advantage of any of the 

technologies that were not available 30 years ago that are clearly available now. … 

Are there enough people working in forested areas now across all public land 

jurisdictions? In my view there are not. 598 

Mr David Evans also referred to “the lack of experienced people whose life’s 

work is in the bush”, and who had previously helped to control the bushfire 

risk, while providing a pool of local knowledge and fire-fighting experience. 

Mr Evans stated that the availability of such a resource was critical to the 

early suppression of bushfires and could also alleviate the burden on 

volunteers during bushfire suppression. 

…the lack of experienced people whose life’s work is in the bush — be it timber 

getters, be it cattlemen, be it people operating tourism et cetera — who used to be 

there, who know the bush extremely well, perhaps do things that decrease the fire 

risk but are available as a pool of experienced people when you do have fires. Again 

I come back to the fact the sooner you can get onto a fire, the more likely you are to 

be able to suppress it without having it run for too long. That also reduces the risk of 

damage to the environment, and it reduces the load, particularly on the volunteer 

people who have to leave their homes for days and weeks on end, come from one 

end of the state to the other. But I think that lack of a pool of experienced people is 

very critical in early suppression of bushfires. 599 

Dr Kevin Tolhurst also emphasised the importance of maintaining a 

workforce within forest environments to ensure a sufficient level of 

experience for subsequent firefighting work: 

Part of the effective work on fires is achieved because of familiarity with working in 

those forest environments, and you do not get that just at fires. That needs to be an 

ongoing experience, if you like, working in there, whether it be for track maintenance, 

for clearing drains, for maintaining picnic grounds, for timber harvesting or for 

whatever. All those incidental experiences are incredibly valuable when it comes to 

firefighting. Typically volunteers will not have those skills or experiences, so I do not 

think we should be asking them to suddenly get that experience under severe 

conditions. … What I am suggesting is that we ought to have a workforce working in 

land management available to a great extent to work on forest fires… 600 

The land and fire agencies acknowledged the need for a degree of access 

to public land for traditional land uses but also noted the bushfire risks 

associated with some uses and the need for regulation. While the agencies 

provided little evidence of the extent of the decline in traditional land uses, in 

general they did not endorse the view that the decline had contributed to the 

scale and intensity of recent bushfires or that it had detracted from the ability 

of agencies to respond. 

598 B. Young, Executive Officer, Plantations North East, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 


599 D. Evans, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 November 2007. 

600 Dr. K. Tolhurst, Senior Lecturer Fire Ecology and Management, School of Forest and Ecosystem 

Science, University of Melbourne, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 2007. 

165

RSCH.016.001.0408 


The general position was summarised by Mr David Nugent, Parks Victoria, 

as follows: 

At the end of the day there is no doubt that in terms of fires there are a number of 

risks and people are a part of that. As I said, we have to manage all those in the best 

way we can, to try to minimise unnecessary fires. 601 

Mr Neil Bibby, Chief Executive Officer, Country Fire Authority also 

highlighted the potential for increased bushfire risks with greater public 

access: 

I have no figures to hand, but what we do know is where there is human intervention 

within a forest environment, that automatically increases the possibility of fires 

occurring. 602 

Mr Ken King, previously Executive Director, Land and Fire Management, 

DSE, also identified the bushfire risks associated with some traditional land 

uses: 

In terms of traditional uses, the main risks to fire starting have been the accidental 

escape of campfires; some ignition from the operation of machinery; and some … 

reckless behaviour associated with recreational activities. … if a track is open, it is 

open to everyone. We do not have a way of stopping people at the gate through 

some other means. 603 

However, the land and fire agencies all acknowledged the important 

contribution of local knowledge to land and fire management. This point was 

articulated by Mr King, who also emphasized the role of the recreational 

industry in the recovery effort following the Grampians fire of 2005/06: 

The traditional users of our forests and parks and the industries that rely on them are 

certainly an important part of our local area knowledge. One of the examples I would 

use in terms of recovery is the Grampians fire where the recreational industry there 

helped us to provide some recovery effort. They provided a hell of a lot of input into 

what was the best way to reopen the park after it was burnt. 604 

Mr King also highlighted the importance of education and engagement in 

meeting this challenge: 

The agencies have relationships with these users continually to educate them about 

the risk of fire, and there was some discussion during the CFA questioning. It is 

about how you get that fire awareness out to everyone… 605 

Mr Nugent informed the Committee of the value that Parks Victoria places 

on maintaining partnerships with a range of groups involved in traditional 

land uses. 606 The importance of informal local relationships between Parks 

166 

601 D. Nugent, Parks Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 November 2007. 

602 N. Bibby, Chief Executive Officer, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 4 

June 2007. 







606 D. Nugent, Parks Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0409 


Victoria and traditional land users was emphasised by Mr Ben Rankin, 

Senior Fire Management Officer, DSE, who stated that it was not unusual to 

receive feedback from graziers regarding areas requiring fuel reduction 

burning. 607 

As noted above, a number of stakeholders questioned the view that the 

restriction of particular traditional uses on public land had adversely 

impacted land and fire management in Victoria. These stakeholders were 

notably critical of the use of timber harvesting and grazing as bushfire 

mitigation strategies. 

The Victorian National Parks Association Inc. expressed the argument 

against Alpine grazing as a bushfire mitigation strategy, as follows: 

…[it] does not reduce blazing by “controlling” the shrubs. Nor do they [cattle] remove 

the bark and litter in the surrounding woodlands and forests that spot fires into the 

alpine and sub-alpine areas. Instead grazing steadily increases blazing over the 

long-term by encouraging the establishment of shrubs within the grasslands. 608 

The Association also argued that rather than mitigating bushfires, timber 

harvesting can in fact exacerbate their severity and rate of spread while 

creating forest types which are more fire-prone: 

The 2003 and 2006-07 fires have encompassed an extremely wide range of forest 

including unlogged and heavily logged areas. There is no evidence that logging 

retarded fires in any way whatsoever. Indeed some of the more severe and / or 

rapidly spreading fire occurred in 2003 to the east of Mt Beauty, south of Coryon and 

to the north-east and east of Benambra all of which had recent logging coupes. 

Logging has been found to create a drier forest type for at least some forest types in 

the short to medium term with changes from damp ferny understoreys to more 

flammable shrubs. 609 

… 

The dense regrowth that occurs after clearfelling will also add to fuel loads. Where 

these regrowth forest are thinned, extreme difficulty has been experienced in 

conducting fuel reduction burning within them because of the high levels of debris 

that results from the thinning operations. Thus it is unlikely that logging, especially 

intensive logging practices, will reduce fire risk – the reverse is more likely. 610 

Similar views regarding the effectiveness of timber harvesting in mitigating 

bushfires were expressed by Mr Charlie Schroeder, Ms Elizabeth Knight, Ms 

Freda Harvey, Ms Robyn Grant, Mr Alistair Traill, the Wilderness Society 

Victoria Inc., the Gippsland Environment Group, Mr Richard Goonan, and 

607 B. Rankin, Senior Fire Management Officer, Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 November 2007. 

608 Victorian National Parks Association Inc., Submission, no. 190, 4 June 2007, p. 13. Emphasis in 

the original omitted. 

609 Victorian National Parks Association Inc., Submission, no. 190, 4 June 2007, p. 13. Reference in 

quotation omitted. 

610 Victorian National Parks Association Inc., Submission, no. 190, 4 June 2007, p. 14. Reference in 

quotation omitted. 

167

RSCH.016.001.0410 


Ms Caroline Copley. 611 The majority of the above stakeholders were also 

critical of grazing as a bushfire mitigation strategy. 

Mr Ralph Barraclough stated that the clearfelling of Alpine ash forest can 

create fire hazards because prescribed burning cannot be conducted in 

regenerating stands: 

Clear felling is really very bad ecologically, but the other thing is it does not lend itself 

to protective management with fire. I think the science in relation to alpine ash being 

a single aged stand stems from the fact that it supports clear felling, and that is 

where the science was directed. You cannot protectively burn the young stands, and 

that is creating a fire hazard. 612 


The Committee considers that there has been a significant decline in 

traditional land uses on public land in recent decades. While it is difficult to 

determine whether this decline has had an impact on the severity of 

bushfires, the Committee considers that an insufficient level of fire in the 

landscape, primarily due to a lack of prescribed burning, is likely to have had 

a significantly greater impact on the scale and intensity of recent bushfires. 

However, the Committee is strongly of the view that the decline in traditional 

land uses has had an obvious impact on the ability of relevant agencies to 

respond, primarily due to the loss of a permanent workforce in forest areas. 

The Committee is mindful that the regulation of traditional land uses is likely 

to continue, given the need to manage Victoria’s public land for a variety of 

purposes, including the protection of water, flora and fauna. Nevertheless, 

the Committee believes that traditional land users make a valuable 

contribution to land and fire management and that this contribution can be 

enhanced through appropriate regulation. Whether existing levels of 

regulation are appropriate must be considered on a case by case basis. 

Accordingly, the particular impacts of specific land uses are considered in 

the following section. 

Finding 5.1: 

That the decline in local knowledge, skill, resources and infrastructure 

associated with the restriction of traditional land uses has had a negative 

impact on the ability of relevant agencies to manage fire on public land. 

168 

611 C. Schroeder, Submission, no. 76, 23 May 2007; E. Knight, Submission, no. 83, 23 May 2007; F. 

Harvey, Submission, no. 85, 23 May 2007; R. Grant, Submission, no. 96, 23 May 2007; A. Traill, 

Submission, no. 103, 24 May 2007; The Wilderness Society Victoria Inc., Submission, no. 140, 28 

May 2007; Gippsland Environment Group, Submission, no. 145, 28 May 2007; R. Goonan, 

Submission, no. 159, 29 May 2007; C. Copley, Submission, no. 244, 18 September 2007. 

612 N. Barraclough, Gippsland Apiarists Association, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0411 


Timber harvesting 

Introduction 

The reduction of timber harvesting on public land in recent decades was the 

traditional land use most commonly identified by stakeholders as having 

negative implications for bushfire severity and the ability of agencies to 

respond. Many of these stakeholders expressed the view that the 

consequent decline of the workforce previously engaged in timber 

harvesting and forest management in these areas, and the associated 

vehicle access tracks and heavy machinery that it had maintained, had 

significantly compromised bushfire prevention and suppression. Some 

stakeholders also advocated particular forms of timber harvesting, thinning 

for example, as a means of regulating fuel loads in Victoria’s forests and of 

thereby preventing bushfires of the scale and intensity experienced in recent 

years. 

A detailed analysis of the extent and causes of the decline in the area of 

public native forest available for timber harvesting is beyond the scope of 

the current report. The main reason for this decline is the process of land 

tenure change – that is, an increase in national parks and other 

conservation reserves – which has occurred in recent decades and which 

has effectively brought timber harvesting to an end in various areas of public 

native forest. 

Changes to land tenure 

A significant number of stakeholders cited changes to land tenure, primarily 

for flora and fauna conservation, as a major explanation for the reduction in 

the area of Victoria’s public native forest in which timber harvesting is 

conducted. The Committee notes that over recent decades, a significant 

proportion of state forest (in which timber harvesting is generally permitted) 

has been transferred to national parks and conservation reserves (in which 

timber harvesting is generally prohibited). 613◊ Since the 1970s, Victoria’s 

national parks have expanded from approximately four to 16 per cent of the 

state. 614 It is likely that public native forest previously held as State forest 

would have accounted for a significant proportion of this increase. 

Changes to the management of State forests 

Changes to the management of Victoria’s State forests have also 

contributed to the reduction in the area of public native forest available for 


Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007, p. 3; Melbourne Water, 'Timber 

Harvesting', viewed 26 May 2008, 

. 

◊ Public native forest previously held as state forest would have accounted for a significant proportion 

of the increase in Victoria’s national park estate over this period. 

614 Parks Victoria, 'History of Parks Victoria', viewed 26 May 2008, 

. 

169

RSCH.016.001.0412 


timber harvesting. According to the Commonwealth Department of 

Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s Australia's State of the Forests Report 

2008, Victoria has approximately 3.16 million hectares of “multiple-use 

public forest” legally available for timber harvesting. 615 However, like all 

other states and territories, Victoria has continued to experience “major 

reductions” in the actual availability of this forest for timber harvesting. 616 

According to the report, this trend is the result of an increased focus on 

managing for other values, particularly conservation values, within such 

forests. 617 

Some of the more significant developments which have reduced the area of 

State forest available for timber harvesting in recent decades include: 

• the Victorian Timber Industry Strategy of 1986, which first 

implemented Forest Management Plans for state forests; 618 

• the Regional Forests Agreements between the Victorian and 

Commonwealth governments, signed between 1997 and 2001, which 

increased reserves in Victoria by more than one third; 619 

• the Victorian Government’s Our Forests, Our Future strategy, which 

introduced a reduction in sawlog volumes of approximately one third 

across the state in 2002; 620 

• the phasing out of logging in the Otways in 2008; 621 and 

• the review into timber harvesting in old growth forests in East 

Gippsland. 

Plantation Forestry 

According to Australia’s State of the Forests Report 2008, plantation forestry 

now dominates Australia’s forestry and timber industries, having expanded 

rapidly since the National Plantation Inventory began collecting data in 

170 

615 Montreal Process Implementation Group for Australia, Australia's State of the Forests Report 

2008, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, 2008, pp. 54-55. 


2008, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, 2008, pp. 54-55. 


2008, Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, 2008, p. 55. 

618 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Forest Management Planning Process', viewed 26 

May 2008, . 

619 Commonwealth Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry, 'Regional Forest Agreement', 

viewed 26 May 2008, . 

620 Department of Natural Resources and Environment, 'Our Forests, Our Future: Victorian 

Government Statement on Forests', viewed 12 June 2008, 

; Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Our 

Forests Our Future - Forest Management Area Fact Sheets', viewed 18 June 2008, 

. 

621 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'A New Future for the Otways Tourism Initiative', 

viewed 18 June 2008, .

RSCH.016.001.0413 


1993. 622 The cultivation, harvesting and processing of logs into sawn timber, 

paper, panels and various other products is now a major source of 

employment, particularly in rural areas. 623 Further, although the total area of 

land used for plantations has continued to increase in all states and 

territories in recent years, plantations occupy a relatively small proportion of 

the rural estate with much of the increase in recent years achieved by 

planting on cleared agricultural land. 624 Notably, Victoria has the largest total 

area of timber plantations, accounting for 22 per cent of the national total of 

both hardwood and softwood plantations. 625 


As noted in the overview of stakeholder evidence above, a significant 

number of stakeholders stated that the restrictions placed on forestry 

operations in public native forests had increased the risks associated with 

bushfires, due to the loss of a workforce with a significant degree of local 

knowledge, skill and experience in bushfire prevention and suppression. 

Many stakeholders also referred to the associated decline in access roads 

and tracks which were now becoming overgrown and inaccessible. 

The situation was summarised by Mr Kevin Erwin, a representative of 

Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, as follows: 

In summary, the reduction and sometimes exclusion of forest industries, with their 

bushcrafts, and laying and maintenance of tracks, has led to an increase of fire 

hazards. 626 

The land and fire management expertise of forestry officers in previous 

years was also noted by Ms Heather Livingstone, President, Buchan/ 

Gelanitpy Branch, Victorian Farmers Federation: 

After European settlers did their bit, forestry officers took over the responsibility of 

maintaining a balanced public land service. These men had a good understanding of 

the bush and mostly did a good management job. They were able to burn when 

conditions were right, and these slow fires kept the bush clean. These forestry 

officers lived in places like Orbost; there was a group in Buchan — each place had 

its group of workmen. They were hands on people; they went out and did what had to 

be done. Now it is much worse. Fires at the right time do not destroy but rather 

manage the bush. But they must be regular… 627 









626 K. Erwin, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

627 H. Livingstone, President, Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, 


171

RSCH.016.001.0414 


The Victorian Association of Forest Industries (VAFI) explained the impact of 

the decline in the timber industry on the network of vehicle access tracks on 

public land as follows: 

The timber industry either directly or through the revenue it generated has 

traditionally provided a network of roads that provide good access to fire fighters. 

Roads suitable for log trucks are suitable for fire tankers. Roads and tracks are used 

for control lines for wildfires, back burns and controlled burns. The removal of the 

industry from large parts of the forest estate over the past two decades has reduced 

this contribution to the construction and maintenance of this road network. The 

standard of the network needs to be significantly improved. 628 

Mr Scott Gentle of Timber Communities Australia stated that many local 

tracks which were established in the Powelltown area following the Ash 

Wednesday fires, had become overgrown with the decline of forestry in the 

area. 629 

A number of stakeholders also emphasized the former effectiveness of the 

timber industry in maintaining an optimum level of prescribed burning. Mr 

Killeen, a former forest worker with 45 years experience working with public 

land management personnel in fire prevention and suppression, outlined the 

way in which the timber industry and the former Forests Commission had 

worked together to ensure a sufficient level of prescribed burning: 

… going back a few years, all the timber industry worked on a selective logging 

regime where you would go through a forest, be given an area, go through it, 

selectively log the trees and then you could go back over that. In our operation from 

1939 to 1987 when we were finished up as logging, we would have logged an area 

three times. … there was much more collaboration with the Forests Commission, 

which is the DSE today, and those places were burnt off. There were restrictions, but 

they were cooperative restrictions. 630 

Mr Killeen also contrasted the continuous presence of the timber industry in 

forested areas in previous years – and its capacity to maintain a flexible 

approach to prescribed burning – with DSE’s current reliance on seasonal 

employees and more restrictive approach to prescribed burning: 

We used to have the little depots around and they had their crew of two, three or four 

crew. They had access to a grader which they shared around with three, four or five 

areas. They shared a dozer around and they had a plan. They used to go and do the 

dozing here and the grading there and they were just going all the time. They were in 

the bush all the time. They might say that that would burn now. They would go back 

to their superiors and say, ‘We should be looking at burning that area’. Yes, all right, 

they would set up a little plan to do that. They would shoot up there and burn that, 

and do a bit out there. If they got up there and found out, ‘If we get down the bottom 

and let it go up the top, it will be too fierce, so we will just stay at the top and will start 

burning down. If it doesn’t want to burn much, we will go down further and burn back 

up again’. They had all those tools at their discretion, but the burns are too 

628 Victorian Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 174, 4 June 2007. 



630 M. Killeen, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007. 

172

RSCH.016.001.0415 


prescriptive now. They call them prescription burns. That is exactly what they are, 

and that is the problem. 631 

The significant reduction in the permanent workforce available for land and 

fire management throughout the year as a result of changes to the timber 

industry was noted by several stakeholders. Mr Trevor Roche, described 

this as the key factor which needed to be addressed for future land 

management: 

In relation to logging, our concern is more about the loss of human resources from 

the department which has occurred — and as I said East Gippsland is a good 

example where significant logging in the past meant a significant distributed resource 

workforce within the forested areas which were automatically available for fire 

suppression during the summer period. 

… logging contractors were available as a part of the conditions for timber being 

made available to them. That resource is no longer there and it ought to be 

compensated for in a similar way based again on the department’s assessment of 

what is actually required. 632 

The loss of a workforce with specialised skills in the operation of heavy 

machinery, particularly in steep country, was also identified by many 

stakeholders as having had a negative impact on bushfire suppression 

capacity. This impact was illustrated by Mr Gary Moran, a logging contractor 

based in Warburton, as follows: 

Once upon a time we had a Board of Works here in Warburton which employed 80 to 

100 blokes. They had their own forestry department, and the pride of the water 

catchments was their fire lines and their roads. It was a situation where they 

managed the water catchment areas and Forestry managed the state forests, and 

that was how we coexisted. If you needed a hand, you needed a hand. Board of 

Works dozers were always sitting down here. They were working. The Forestry 

dozers were always working, doing 1,000 to 1,500 hours a year with all this 

preventative maintenance work. Anyway, things have changed a little bit. 633 

This issue has been identified as of particular importance in remote areas, 

such as East Gippsland, where: 

historically, there was a strong link between commercial forestry and fire 

management / protection. … Most bushfires in East Gippsland will continue to be 

controlled using bulldozers as the primary agent. The bulldozer operator skill is 

paramount here, taking the lead in achieving fire control, doing this safely and 

minimising the environmental impact. Operators from the timber industry understand 

these factors and have proven to be the best at this demanding work relative to, for 

example, operators from the earth moving sector. While highly skilled, they have less 

knowledge of the forests, their environments and fire fighting. Other people fighting 

fires also rely on the bulldozer operators to protect them if the fire situation changes. 

631 M. Killeen, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007. 



633 G. Moran, Transcript of evidence, Warburton, 8 October 2007. 

173

RSCH.016.001.0416 


In remote locations, there are few alternatives for machines or operators outside the 

forest industry. 634 


The Committee is strongly of the view that the decline in the timber industry 

workforce has had a number of impacts including: a loss of expertise in land 

and fire management; reduced knowledge of local conditions; a reduction in 

the machinery available for bushfire suppression, particularly in remote 

areas; and a decline in the number and accessibility of vehicle access 

tracks. Collectively, these impacts have detracted from the capacity of 

relevant agencies to respond to bushfires. 

This impact should be addressed as a matter of priority through a significant 

increase in the number of regionally-based, permanent, or long-tenured, fire 

management personnel – with a wide variety of practical and specialist skills 

– as per recommendation 2.7. 

Finding 5.2: 

That the reduction in the extent of timber harvesting on public land and 

associated loss of local knowledge and expertise, machinery available for fire 

prevention and suppression, and a decline in the number and accessibility of 

vehicle access tracks has had a negative impact on land and fire 

management, particularly the bushfire suppression capacity of relevant 

agencies. 

Management of timber on public land 

The Victorian Association of Forest Industries (VAFI) and the National 

Association of Forest Industries (NAFI) referred to the potential of timber 

harvesting as a bushfire mitigation and ecological enhancement strategy in 

Victoria’s forests. Other stakeholders who advocated the more active 

management of Victoria’s forests included the Institute of Foresters in 

Australia, Mr Peter Attiwill and Push for the Bush. 635 

The Victorian Association of Forest Industries (VAFI) is the peak industry 

body for the native hardwood timber processing industry in Victoria. In its 

submission to the Inquiry VAFI identified two trends in forest management 

during the past decade as having directly increased the risk of large and 

intense bushfires: the “passive” management of the forests held in parks 

and reserves compared to the “active” management of State forests; and the 

creation of additional parks and reserves in response to election 

commitments. 636 According to VAFI, these trends have “increased the 

average fuel loads across the state up to the point when they are consumed 

174 

634 MBAC Consulting, 'A Socioeconomic Impact of the Timber Industry on Communities within East 

Gippsland FMA, Victoria', viewed 10 June 2008, 

. 

635 Institute of Foresters Australia, Submission, no. 138, 28 May 2007.; P. Attiwell, Submission, no. 

177, 31 May 2007.; Push for the Bush, Submission, no. 187, 4 June 2007. 

636 Victorian Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 174, 4 June 2007, p. 4.

RSCH.016.001.0417 


by mega fires”. 637 VAFI defined the concept of “active” forest management 

as a combination of timber harvesting and prescribed burning across the 

forested landscape and “passive” management as its opposite. 638 VAFI 

argued that it is possible to “provide an active management regime that will 

protect Victoria from catastrophic fires and minimise the impacts when they 

do occur” and suggested the following timber harvesting methods as part of 

such a regime: 

• clearfelling and seed tree silviculture, which can also create young 

forest in strategic and controlled locations; 

• selective harvesting of dry forests to provide greater access and 

water yields and scattered regeneration to replace the older trees; 

and 

• thinning of dense undergrowth stands, which also produces larger 

trees in a shorter time period, reduces water usage by trees and 

increases access to tree stands. 639◊ 

VAFI concluded its submission with nine land and fire management 

recommendations, two of which are of particular note in the current context: 

Integrated active land management [should] be applied to all of the public land in 

Victoria with continued access to timber yielding stands for the industry in areas 

where there are important timber values and lesser biodiversity values. Active 

management should use silviculture and fire to provide a diversity of forest ages and 

fuel loadings across the forest landscape to reduce the severity and impacts of 

uncontrolled wildfire and to protect neighbouring communities. 

… [and] 

Timber harvesting [should] be allowed in Melbourne’s water catchments so that 

young forests can be provided in a controlled manner and for ecological purposes. 640 

VAFI suggested that a “widespread thinning program in the catchments 

especially in the 1939 regrowth forests and in the future regrowth forests” 

would be preferable to the ongoing construction of a network of firebreaks in 

Melbourne’s catchments (discussed in Chapter Four) and could reduce the 

impacts of bushfires while providing water and timber in the interim. 641 

The National Association of Forest Industries (NAFI) is the peak national 

body representing the interests of Australia’s forest and timber industry. Like 

VAFI, NAFI’s submission to the Inquiry advocated the active management of 

forested public land in Victoria: 

637 Victorian Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 174, 4 June 2007, p. 4. 

638 Victorian Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 174, 4 June 2007, pp. 4-5, 8. 

639 Victorian Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 174, 4 June 2007, pp. 4-5. 

◊ DSE’s Forest Glossary defines thinning as the “removal of part of a stand, with the aim of increasing 

the growth rate and/or health of the retained trees…”: Department of Sustainability and Environment, 

'Forest Glossary', viewed 18 June 2008, . Definitions of a range of other 

timber harvesting techniques are also provided. 



175

RSCH.016.001.0418 


With so many variables affecting the functioning of forest ecosystems, and the often 

ineffective management of reserved areas, it is of concern to the forest industry that 

governments often believe the only way to protect the forests is to lock them up in 

reserves. To overcome both of these problems, greater consideration should be 

given to the possibilities of using selected forest harvesting and thinning techniques 

together with prescribed burning as complementary active management tools… 642 

NAFI also cited the recent adoption of an active management approach to 

forests in the United States under the “Healthy Forests Initiative”, which was 

developed as a response to large wildfires in that country in recent years. 643 

The Initiative called for “active forest management…through thinning and 

prescribed burns, to reduce the unnatural buildup of fuels”. 644 According to 

the Initiative: 

The real solution to catastrophic wildfires is to address their causes by reducing fuel 

hazards and returning our forests and rangelands to healthy conditions. Tree thinning 

and removal of dense underbrush can ensure thriving forests while reducing risks of 

catastrophic fires and the dangers they pose to firefighters. 645 

The Committee was provided with little evidence regarding the effectiveness 

of timber harvesting in mitigating the scale and intensity of bushfires. The 

view that timber harvesting represents an effective bushfire mitigation tool 

has been rejected by leading forest ecologists, such as Professor David 

Lindenmayer of the Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies at the 

Australian National University, who has noted: 

Despite reading more than an estimated 10,000 papers and reports on forests and 

forest management over the last 20 years, I have been unable to find any evidence 

to support the argument that logging is needed to protect forests from fire. There are 

many examples where major fires have occurred in areas that were previously 

heavily logged – the 1983 Ash Wednesday fires in Victoria is one of many cases. 646 

Mr Rod Newnham, Regional Manager West, Parks Victoria, also questioned 

the effectiveness of timber harvesting as a bushfire mitigation strategy: 

I have been involved in managing fires that have gone straight through areas where 

timber harvesting has been going on for quite a long time as well. Personally I cannot 

say I have noticed less fires where there has been timber harvesting, if that is what 

you are actually asking about.. 647 

176 

642 National Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 245, 17 September 2007, p. 3. 

643 National Association of Forest Industries, Submission, no. 245, 17 September 2007, pp. 10-11. 

644 The White House, ' Reducing the Threat of Catastrophic Wildfires and Improving Forest Health', 

viewed 5 June 2008, .. More generally, see: 

The White House, 'Healthy Forest : An Initiative for Wildfire Prevention and Stronger Communities ', 

viewed 5 June 2008, . 

645 The White House, 'Healthy Forest : An Initiative for Wildfire Prevention and Stronger Communities 

', viewed 5 June 2008, . 

646 G. Cary, D. Lindenmayer and S. Dovers, Australia Burning: Fire Ecology, Policy and Management 

Issues, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 2003, p. 85. 

647 R. Newnham, Regional Manager, West, Parks Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 

2007.

RSCH.016.001.0419 


Grazing 

Mr Ewan Waller, DSE, noted that the effects of timber harvesting on bushfire 

severity remains an open question and is the subject of ongoing research by 

DSE: 

It was interesting to observe after the recent fire, with the timber harvesting — and it 

went through quite a lot of the area around Bruthen that had been logged. It varied a 

lot. The fire actually went out or moved slowly through some of the regenerated 

areas, but other areas it ground through, so there is nothing really definitive, I do not 

think, with logging for or against with the spread of fire. There is some move around, 

particularly in southern Europe, the thinning of forests to reduce fuel loads, and that 

is also happening in the United States. It is something we will be looking at in the 

future — whether actually physically thinning the forest will actually reduce fuel loads. 

It is not definitive, and there is work going on with it. 648 

The Committee agrees that there is a need for more active management of 

Victoria’s forested public land, including forests currently set aside in 

national parks and reserves, both for bushfire mitigation and for ecological 

reasons. However, the Committee believes that the active management of 

ecologically sensitive areas such as national parks and reserves should 

occur in a way that, as far as possible, reflects natural processes. The 

Committee therefore concludes that an increase in prescribed burning, as 

recommended in Chapter Two, is currently the most appropriate tool for the 

active management of Victoria’s non-production public forests. 


That the Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner 

agencies conduct or commission research, and a possible trial study, to 

determine the potential of thinning and other silvicultural practices – whether 

alone or in combination with prescribed burning – as a means of reducing 

fuel loads and as a bushfire management strategy in Victoria’s forests. 

The Committee received evidence from a significant number of stakeholders 

who argued in favour of grazing on public land as an effective fuel reduction 

tool. A number of these stakeholders were particularly critical of the 

Government’s decision in 2005 to end grazing in Victoria’s Alpine National 

Park and argued that this had contributed to an increase in fuel loads and 

the severity of recent bushfires. While the Committee notes that grazing 

continues in some Alpine areas outside of the Alpine National Park, the 

timing and duration of grazing access, as in other areas of public land, is 

significantly more regulated than in previous years. 

A number of stakeholders also argued that there is a close association 

between grazing and effective prescribed burning, both in Alpine and non- 

Alpine areas. Stakeholders argued that an inadequate level of prescribed 

burning had altered forest vegetation from a relatively open and grassy 



177

RSCH.016.001.0420 


condition to a more closed and dense environment which is no longer 

suitable for grazing. In relation to Alpine areas, stakeholders also argued 

that grazing had previously maintained Alpine vegetation at a level which 

allowed the safe conduct of prescribed burning. 

Ms Heather Livingstone, President, Buchan/Gelanitpy Branch, Victorian 

Farmers Federation, outlined the extent of cattle grazing in native forests in 

previous decades, citing the particular example of Gippsland: 

After Europeans arrived the settlers followed the Aboriginal ways and the country 

was all open, rolling grassland. My father said it was paradise on earth. Orbost right 

through Gelantipy, Wulgulmerang, Omeo and all that country was rolling grassland, 

and the settlers came there because it was great for their cattle. Now … [it has] 

changed it into just scrub land. I can remember driving from Gelantipy to Bairnsdale 

and there were cattle grazing all through the open, grassy land. There were gum 

trees, yes, but lots of patches of open grassland — it was really great. That gradually 

got overtaken with scrub… 649 

Mr Chris Commins of the Mountain Cattlemen’s Association stated that 

although the Association had never argued that grazing prevents bushfires, 

it was strongly of the view that it plays an important role in mitigating its 

effects: 

I also think that cattle — contrary to some evidence that was stated before — do 

have a very good mitigating effect on fire. It is absolute nonsense — Bruce Esplin’s 

comment after the 2003 fires — that there is no scientific evidence that grazing 

prevents blazing. It was a rather curious statement, because we have never, ever 

said that. We have always said that grazing mitigates the effects of fire. 650 

Mr Bob Adams of the Alpine Conservation Access Group was also critical of 

the finding in the Esplin Report that available scientific evidence does not 

support cattle grazing in Alpine areas for the purposes of bushfire mitigation: 

ACAG has no confidence in Mr Esplin’s highly flawed report, especially about high 

country grazing not reducing blazing. Some people within the scientific community 

involved in the recent decision making process regarding the banning of high country 

cattle grazing were biased in their findings to have cattle removed from the high 

country. 651 

Mr Adams went on to cite the 2002/03 fires as an example of the 

effectiveness of grazing in mitigating the severity of bushfires in Alpine 

areas: 

…during the 2003 fires large grazed areas of the Bogong High Plains did not burn. 

The reason for this was fuel reduction by cattle grazing. Three years later, with cattle 

grazing excluded, the majority of the alpine grasslands were burnt pitch black, even 

178 

649 H. Livingstone, President, Buchan/Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation, 


650 C. Commins, Mountain Cattleman's Association of Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 


651 B. Adams, Media Officer, Alpine Conservation and Access Group, Transcript of evidence, Mount 

Beauty, 28 November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0421 


killing snow gum trees several hundred years old. The exception was the brumby 

grazed areas, which did not burn. 652 

Similar views were expressed by a number of stakeholders, including Mr 

Ralph. Barraclough, 653 Mr Kevin Higgins, 654 Mr David Evans, 655 and Mr John 

O’Brien. 656 Mr O’Brien described the effectiveness of grazing in reducing the 

fine fuel on the forest floor and the associated prescribed burning previously 

practiced by graziers as follows: 

Cattle tended to take out the fines of the base of the forest — that is, the grass. You 

might not think they did a lot there, but they took out those fines and during the 

autumn period when the cattlemen returned with their herds in April … they had a 

great tendency to throw out a match every couple of hundred metres along the ridge 

lines. They knew they were coming out just about a fortnight ahead of the snow 

season, so the weather was changing, and those burns just trickled down. The fires 

might have gone 100 metres or 200 metres and then they stopped because of the 

wetness and that was coming in. That had a major effect. 657 

This view was essentially echoed by Mr Jack Hicks of the Alpine 

Conservation and Access Group, who stated that grazing in Alpine areas 

previously supported the practice of prescribed burning by maintaining 

grassy vegetation at a level which minimised the risks associated with 

subsequent burns: 

…pre the 1939 bushfires the cattlemen basically did the fuel reduction burning 

adjoining the alpine grasslands. So what you saw was the cattlemen actually did the 

fuel reduction burning straight immediately under those runs, so you did not have the 

high build up of fuel loads to run out across the grasslands. 

In extreme weather … if the grasses are grazed, the fire will run out. … the cattle 

have been taken off the grasslands up here, so there is no way of doing fuel 

reduction burning on the adjoining forest montane, because it is going to run out into 

the grass. To effectively manage this high country … we are going to have to find a 

way of managing the fuel loads. If you take the cattle off the tops, you cannot do fuel 

reduction burning straight immediately under them. 658 

Mr Hicks also referred to the effectiveness of cattle grazing in reducing the 

mid storey of fuel within forests, thereby reducing the subsequent severity of 

bushfires: 

Cattle would go through and selectively take out — they would trample or eat or 

whatever they do — the trees that did not grow as quickly, so after 10 or 15 years, 

with the proper stocking rate and the proper fuel reduction, you would find that you 

would have a more open forest. 

…you have got to have something there to push them [the smaller trees] onto the 

floor and trample them down so that you have not got a mid storey of fuel. What 


Beauty, 28 November 2007. 

653 R. Barraclough, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007. 


655 D. Evans, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 November 2007. 

656 J. O'Brien, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

657 J. O'Brien, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007. 

658 J. Hicks, Vice-President, Alpine Conservation and Access Group, Transcript of evidence, Mount 


179

RSCH.016.001.0422 


selective grazing or selective fuel reduction burning does is take out that fine mid 

storey fuel. Then when you get a lightning strike that comes through and it is on the 

ground, there is nothing to take it from that ground area to the treetops, because you 

have knocked out the mid fuel, and that is hop scrub and dogwood, and it grows as 

high as your head sitting on a horse and you cannot get through it. But once you put 

a cool burn through that or some cattle through it, it is not a problem. 659 

In summary, many stakeholders were of the view that the previously 

synergistic relationship between grazing and prescribed burning had been 

lost because: graziers are no longer active on public land to regulate fuel 

loads through grazing and prescribed burning; much of Victoria’s public land 

has been altered such that it is now less suitable for grazing and a more 

difficult environment in which to conduct prescribed burns. These trends 

were captured by Mr Simon Turner of the Mountain Cattlemen’s Association, 

who noted that many areas were now: 

…ungrazable, not through legislation or any other methods other than due to 

changes in the forest type. That has been a sort of scrubbing up effect, I suppose, a 

change in vegetation type where it is just not suitable for cattle to utilise those 

regions. That highlights the changes we see and therefore reflects the extent of the 

management [changes] …The timing and the effectiveness of prescribed burning 

goes hand in hand. 660 

Mr Turner emphasised that this trend was not restricted to Alpine areas: 

If you look at grazing maps of the coastal region, you will find that at Cann River 

through Mallacoota, that region through there, contains significant amounts of open 

areas that were suited to grazing. Those licensees were not forced off there by 

legislation or anything like that. They were forced off there by change in the 

environment. You had less fire — no fire, in some cases — in the environment and 

therefore you had the scrubby species. If you do not have a disturbance there to 

break that cycle of dominance by the dominant growing species in that ecosystem, it 

takes over. 

…the evidence in itself was in the grazing licences that are no longer used, purely 

because they are not useable. The environment has changed. It is not a grassy 

forest any more; it is a thicket in those regions. That is why they are not used. …You 

do not have to go into the alpine region to find that sort of a change. It is all related 

back to fire. 661 

In relation to this issue, Mr Howard Crothers advocated the use of grazing in 

small Crown reserves located near townships as a fuel reduction strategy: 

Another area of concern to us is the bushland reserves surrounding the small towns 

in this region. In many cases native vegetation, introduced grasses and weeds are 

growing alongside residential properties. … There are a lot of small Crown land 

reserves in this region most ranging in area from 10 hectares to 200 hectares with no 

fire management program at all — to our knowledge. Some are trees and scrub, 

some are open grassland. It is rather difficult to have some sort of a fire management 

180 






November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0423 


plan for these small reserves. The fuel load in some of the reserves could be greatly 

reduced by strategic grazing as controlled burns would be difficult in those 

reserves. 662 

Despite the number of submissions provided to the Committee in support of 

grazing as a bushfire mitigation strategy, agency stakeholders were 

generally unsupportive of this view. 

Mr Ken King, DSE referred to both the Esplin Report and the McLeod inquiry 

in the ACT in relation to the effectiveness of grazing in bushfire mitigation. 

Mr King noted the finding of the Esplin Report that grazing by cattle on high 

country grasslands and herb fields does not reduce the flammability of 

associated shrubs and the finding of the McLeod Report that while grazing 

can have some impact in reducing fuel loads, it has little effect on the 

accumulation of dry forest fuels. 663 

Dr Dick Williams of CSIRO’s Sustainable Ecosystems was also critical of the 

view that grazing in Alpine areas is effective as a bushfire mitigation tool: 

…the CSIRO has long been involved in research on livestock grazing in alpine 

environments. This research has shown that livestock grazing in alpine environments 

is not an effective fire mitigation tool and had no detectable influence on the extent or 

severity of fire on the treeless vegetation of the Bogong High Plains following the 

2003 fires. 664 

This view was essentially reiterated by Mr David Nugent of Parks Victoria: 

On the question about alpine grazing, after the 2003 fires some work was done by 

the CSIRO to assess the occurrence of burning in those areas that were grazed and 

ungrazed. It was found that both the areas that were grazed and those that were not 

grazed were burnt. During 2003, 45 of the licensed areas were burnt, and of those 

grazed and burnt licences, 93 per cent burnt to varying degrees of severity. Certainly 

in relation to the high plains area it was found that areas of the grassland did not 

burn. I think that one of the things that we have found in the fires in the high plains, 

through some of the work that CSIRO has done for us, is that the things that we call 

the closed heaths and the open heaths hold very flammable fuels and in fact they are 

more flammable than the actual grasslands. CSIRO has been able to demonstrate 

that for us. 665 

While grazing in Alpine areas and in national parks is generally not 

endorsed by land and fire management agencies as an effective or 

appropriate bushfire mitigation strategy, its role in fuel reduction in some 

circumstances, primarily in State forest, has been recognised by DSE. The 

Code of Practice provides: 

662 H. Crothers, President, Underbool Branch of the Victoria Farmers Federation, Transcript of 

evidence, Ouyen, 11 September 2007. 



664 Dr. D. Williams, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 27 August 

2007. 

665 D. Nugent, Parks Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 November 2007. 

181

RSCH.016.001.0424 


Conclusion 

The Department may authorise grazing regimes by farm animals for fuel 

management but only where it is the most appropriate means of fuel management 

consistent with other land management objectives. 

Grazing is generally appropriate only for significantly modified habitats. 

All grazing for fuel management must occur within the context of a Fire Management 

Plan and the areas where it is appropriate will generally be specified in that plan. 

Any authority issued by the Department to graze for fuel management purposes must 

specify the type of livestock, intensity, and period of grazing as determined by the fire 

specialist after consultation with the flora/ fauna, any other relevant specialists and 

the authorised grazier. 

The Department must monitor the progress of grazing and suspend it when fuel 

management objectives have been achieved. 666 

According to Victoria’s State of the Forests Report, cattle grazing in 

Victoria’s public forests: 

… is usually [allowed] for periods of up to 12 weeks each year in summer and early 

autumn. Licensed grazing blocks are generally used to supplement the capacity of 

the private lands used by licence holders. While access to these forested areas is 

important to individual operators, their economic importance in terms of revenue 

generated to Victoria is minimal. The majority of ‘bush grazing’ occurs in sub-alpine 

areas and along river frontages on Crown Land. Cattle grazing can impact on 

regenerating forest through trampling and browsing of young seedlings. This can 

reduce regeneration of forest areas, particularly following harvesting. Grazing, 

therefore, needs to be monitored to ensure that impacts are minimised. 667 

In conclusion, the Committee notes the scientific evidence that grazing may 

not be an effective or preferable bushfire mitigation strategy alone but 

believes that it can be used as a tool to complement other fuel reduction 

strategies on public land. 

Four wheel driving 

The Committee received submissions from a number of Victorian Four 

Wheel Drive (4WD) clubs, each of which argued that four-wheel driving has 

a positive impact on bushfire prevention and suppression, primarily by 

ensuring that access tracks are maintained and remain open for bushfire 

suppression. The clubs also raised a number of concerns with the current 

level of access provided for owners of 4WD vehicles and noted that greater 

use could be made of the maintenance resource which their members 

represent. 

182 




of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2005, p. 130.

RSCH.016.001.0425 


The Victorian Four Wheel Drive Club Inc. was critical of what it described as 

the Government’s policy of closing fire access tracks and allowing them to 

re-vegetate, noting that almost 50 tracks had been closed under the Bunyip 

State Park Recreation Framework. According to the Club: 

Access to our State and National Parks is becoming increasingly more difficult to 

achieve at a time when the Fire Authorities need is greatest. In view of the past 

cooperation between Four Wheel Drive Clubs and the state authorities it is 

disappointing that the lessons of the past have not been heeded. It is of further 

disappointment that the state does not make greater use of this often and willing and 

experienced volunteer resource to regularly conduct the types of track surveys that 

the authorities are simply not able to complete. 668 

Similar concerns regarding the poor condition and closure of access tracks, 

and the under-utilisation of recreational 4WD owners for track maintenance, 

were expressed by the Hamilton District Four Wheel Drive Club Inc. 669 and 

the Warrnambool Four Wheel Drive Club Inc. 670 The Bushtrek 4WD club 

also referred to the role of 4WD clubs in ensuring that tracks remain open 

for firefighting by assisting with the clearance of overgrowth and in providing 

feedback to DSE regarding track conditions and hazards. 671 

In its submissions to the Inquiry, the Macalister Four Wheel Drive Touring 

and Social Club Inc. informed the Committee that its members shared a 

sense of responsibility for the good management of the State’s public land. 

The club also stated that its members had adhered to the Seasonal Closure 

of four wheel drive tracks each year (from the Queen’s Birthday long 

weekend in June until November on the Melbourne Cup long weekend) 

since the policy began in 1977 because they accepted that many tracks 

were unsuitable for Winter use. 672 

However, the club stated that there are currently no track maintenance 

workers employed to keep fire access tracks open and that this work is now 

undertaken by 4WD clubs, the majority of which are based in metropolitan 

areas and are only available to carry out such work on weekends. 673 

The club also stated that commercial and recreational users had effectively 

ensured that fire access tracks had remained accessible and open during 

the recent fires, in contrast to “management vehicle only tracks” which had 

become un-roadworthy due to a lack of use: 

The effect that commercial and recreation interests have upon public land 

management is obvious because fire access tracks that were kept open in our recent 

fires were those used by commerce and recreation. 

668 Victorian Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 189, 4 June 2007, pp. 2-3. 

669 Hamilton and District Four Wheel Drive Club, Submission, no. 59, 16 May 2007, p. 1. 

670 Warrnambool 4WD Club Inc., Submission, no. 126, 25 May 2007, p. 2. 

671 Bushtrek 4WD Club, Submission, no. 226, 18 July 2007, p. 1. 

672 MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 52, 9 May 2007. Covering Letter. 

673 MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 52, 9 May 2007, p. 1. 

183

RSCH.016.001.0426 


Management vehicle only tracks were inaccessible to fire fighters due to a lack of 

Management Vehicle use. This lack of management use was due to the lack of 

management staff [employed in land and fire management]. 674 

The club suggested that allowing trained industry and recreational drivers to 

access Management Vehicle Only tracks, and an increase in workers on the 

public land estate, would ensure that such tracks remain open for use during 

future fires. 675 The club also stated that the Government had promised to 

provide 4WD Clubs with access to Management Vehicle Only Tracks prior to 

the last State Election but that this had yet to occur. 676 

The Bendigo Four Wheel Drive Club Inc. referred to the problem of track 

closures in response to damage caused by users who were not responsible 

members of a 4WD club and suggested that instead of closing such tracks, 

it would be preferable to engage 4WD clubs in education and awareness 

raising within the community. The club also stated that considerate 4WD 

users provide a basic level of track maintenance by removing debris and 

fallen branches. 677 The club also referred to the repair and recovery 

assistance provided by 4WD clubs following fires, noting that this activity is 

coordinated at both a local and state level. 678 

Finally, the club noted that although the presence of campers can be of 

concern to land and fire agencies during bushfire suppression operations, 

4WD users pose less of a problem in this regard: 

…this issue is minimal with an organized group of four-wheel drivers. Our vehicles 

are all equipped with radios and we travel in convoys; in the event of the detection of 

a fire or another emergency, the club group is well equipped to deal with the 

emergency and raise an early alarm. 679 

A number of other stakeholders also supported increased access to tracks 

by 4WD owners and clubs as a cost-effective means of maintaining tracks 

for bushfire suppression, including: Councillor Roslyn MacInnes of Horsham 

Rural City Council 680 and Mr Jack Hicks, Vice President of the Alpine 

Conservation and Access Group. 681 

The view that 4WD access is of benefit to bushfire prevention and 

suppression, however, was not universally shared. Mr Rod Newnham, Parks 

Victoria, argued that four-wheel driving made only a minor contribution to fire 

management: 

184 

674 MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 52, 9 May 2007, p. 6. 

675 MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 52, 9 May 2007, pp. 6-7. 

676 MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Club Inc., Submission, no. 52B, 9 August 2007, p. 1. 

677 Bendigo 4WD Club Inc., Submission, no. 110, 25 May 2007, p. 1. 



680 Councillor R. MacInnes, Horsham Rural City Council, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 

2007. 


Beauty, 28 November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0427 


As to four wheel drives, I would say again there is probably not a great impact either 

way. We would maintain some tracks quite specifically for the primary function of 

access for four wheel drives but that allows access for firefighters as well. Four wheel 

drives would sometimes use tracks that we have maintained for fire access purposes 

anyway, so there is some synergy there; but if there was no four wheel driving, then 

probably we would maintain a lot of those tracks at least to the standards that we 

require for fire access. I do not think there would be too many negative impacts in 

regard to fire from a four wheel drive perspective, and sometimes there might be 

some incidental benefits as far as some rubbish being cleared off tracks as vehicles 

go through the less used tracks. 682 

Some stakeholders argued that four-wheel driving can in fact damage tracks 

which are required for bushfire suppression. Mr Gentle of Timber 

Communities Australia stated that maintenance tracks established following 

the Ash Wednesday fires, particularly in the Powelltown area, had been 

“chewed up” by 4WD vehicles, as well as bike riders and other users. 683 The 

potential damage to water quality through increased erosion from four-wheel 

driving was also cited by some stakeholders. 684 

The Committee notes that both DSE and PV publish information regarding 

the accessibility of 4WD tracks on their websites, including maps of existing 

tracks and details of closure periods. Maps of 4WD tracks are shown on 

DSE’s website, on Fireplan and on other interactive maps. The DSE website 

also provides a link to a touring code for 4WD users while the PV website 

contains a link to the Memorandum of Understanding that it has signed with 

4WD Victoria Inc. 685 

Both PV and DSE are also parties to a Memorandum of Cooperation 

between Four Wheel Drive Victoria, Parks Victoria & DSE which sets out the 

responsibilities of both agencies in relation to the network of four wheel drive 

tracks under their respective administration. Under the Memorandum, both 

PV and DSE have agreed to: 

• provide appropriate and equitable access to parks and reserves for a 

diverse range of recreation and tourism opportunities; 

• plan and manage four wheel drive use of parks and reserves to 

conserve, protect and enhance environmental and cultural values; 

and 


2007. 



684 G. Harper, Manager, Assets, Grampians Wimmera Mallee Water, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 

4 July 2007. 

685 Department of Sustainability and Environment and Parks Victoria, 'Memorandum of Cooperation 

between Four Wheel Drive Victoria and the Department of Sustainability and Environment', viewed 16 

June 2008, . 

185

RSCH.016.001.0428 


• responsibly meet the needs of four wheel drivers for quality 

information, services, and experiences. 686 

Discussion and Conclusion 

The Committee acknowledges that while there is a need to regulate the 

access of 4WD vehicles to public land, this recreational activity does have 

significant potential to contribute to land and fire management. While this 

potential is increasingly recognised by both DSE and PV, the Committee 

considers that further efforts could be made to consolidate the agencies’ 

partnership approach to track management with 4WD clubs. The 

Committee also considers that four-wheel driving on public land is one of a 

number of public land uses that could be better managed through increased 

community engagement. Effectively managed, 4WD access has the 

potential to play a greater role in ensuring that tracks remain open and 

accessible for bushfire prevention and suppression, since responsible users 

do play an important role in minor track maintenance and in providing 

feedback to agencies regarding track and fire hazards. The ongoing efforts 

of the agencies to utilise this important resource should therefore be 

encouraged. 


That the Victorian Government expedite the implementation of its 2006 

election commitment to provide four wheel drive clubs with access to 

management vehicle only tracks. 

Prospecting and mining 

Introduction 

In this section, the Committee focuses on prospecting and small-scale 

mining as these are the extractive activities that have traditionally occurred 

on public land in relation to which the Committee received evidence. 

Prospecting involves the search for minerals, such as gold nuggets and 

gemstones, under a Miners Right (available from the Department of Primary 

Industries) and is primarily conducted using a metal-detector, gold pan or 

small riffle-box. Prospectors are restricted to the use of hand tools when 

digging. Prospectors are prohibited from disturbing native vegetation and 

must rehabilitate any excavations. 687 Prospecting is allowed in most State 

186 

686 Department of Sustainability and Environment and Parks Victoria, 'Memorandum of Cooperation 

between Four Wheel Drive Victoria and the Department of Sustainability and Environment', viewed 16 

June 2008, . 

687 Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria, Submission, no. 233, 23 June 2007, p. 1. See 

also: Parks Victoria, 'Prospecting and Fossicking', viewed 12 June 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0429 


forests and many reserves but is prohibited in Reference Areas, most state 

or national parks (with some exceptions) and certain streams and rivers. 688 

Smaller-scale mining involves the extraction of minerals under a Mining 

Licence, usually on areas of under five hectares. Mining methods vary but 

can include the sinking of a mine-shaft, the use of a bulldozer and a metal 

detector, or the use of a washplant. Miners are also required to rehabilitate 

and revegetate any excavations. 689 In 2002, approximately 800 mining 

licences were granted in Victoria’s forests, covering a total area of around 

360,000 hectares. 690 

Evidence from stakeholders 

The Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria (the peak body 

representing the interests of prospectors and smaller-scale miners in 

Victoria) expressed the view that there had been an increase in the 

frequency and intensity of bushfires on public land as a result of changes to 

public land management practices. 691 In common with a range of other 

stakeholders, the Association identified the reduced access to public land 

by traditional land users as having contributed to this trend. 

The Association noted that prospecting provides a benefit to land and fire 

management because prospectors often clear areas that are overgrown 

with blackberries or other weeds to gain access to sites. 692 According to the 

Association: 

There is no valid reason to exclude prospecting; it is a waste of government time and 

resources. The bush would be better off with prospectors there as eyes and ears 

contributing to track clearance, albeit maybe just moving the odd fallen tree. To me 

this is evidence that the whole direction of public land management is definitely 

askew. 693 

The Association also noted that although mining provides a comparatively 

greater contribution to bushfire prevention and suppression than 

prospecting, this contribution had been significantly reduced by the decline 

of the industry on public land since the 1980s and the associated loss of its 

earth-moving machinery for use in bushfire suppression: 

Having small-scale mines on Crown land should be seen as a bonus, as smallminers 

have earth moving machinery which can be called upon during fire-fighting 

operations. No recognition is ever given to this positive nature of small-scale mining 

in relation to fighting bushfires. Small miners and their earth moving equipment were, 

until recent times, able to be called upon to join fire fighters to establish firebreaks, 

688 Parks Victoria, 'Prospecting Guide', viewed 11 June 2008, 

. 

689 Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria, Submission, no. 233, 23 June 2007, p. 1. 



691 Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria, Submission, no. 233, 23 June 2007. 

692 R. Bentley, President, Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria, Transcript of evidence, 

Melbourne, 19 November 2007. 



187

RSCH.016.001.0430 


Hunting 

conduct track clearance or similar activities. With the systematic removal of 

opportunities for small-scale mining in Victoria, the opportunities for small-miners to 

contribute are also disappearing. 694 

Ms Rita Bentley, President of the Prospectors and Miners Association of 

Victoria, quoted the following comments of a colleague, Mr Neil Saville, who 

had used mining equipment to assist in fighting the Maryborough fires of 

1985: 

The Maryborough fires were extensive and we were in all kinds of trouble, as were 

many other people, trying to fight the fire. … We used our CAT 988 front end loader 

along with the CFA to cut firebreaks and made our dam water available to the CFA. 

Our mining activity, along with other people using the bush, put us in a position to 

fight the fire and reduce the damage to the bush and private property. This defence 

will never happen in parks and reserves where no one is allowed to do anything any 

more. This policy will see a disaster one day, beyond our imagination. 695 

The Association also noted that both prospectors and miners were major 

users of access tracks and played an important role in ensuring that these 

remained open and clear of debris. 696 

As noted in the introduction to this chapter, the land and fire agencies were 

generally of the view that mining and prospecting, like other traditional land 

uses, did not have an intrinsically positive or negative effect on the severity 

of bushfires or the ability of agencies to respond. However, the agencies did 

acknowledge that, as with a range of other traditional land uses, mining and 

prospecting on public land do contribute to vehicle track maintenance and 

access. 697 

Hunting is a popular traditional land use in Victoria, in which more than 

30,000 licensed hunters currently participate. 698 Hunting is managed and 

administered by DSE, which issues licences to hunt the following species: 

• ducks; 

• stubble quail; 

• sambar deer; 

• hog deer; 

• red deer; and 

188 

694 J. Malloy, Submission, no. 223, 3 July 2007, p. 2. 





697 See for example: R. Newnham, Regional Manager, West, Parks Victoria, Transcript of evidence, 

Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 

698 Parks Victoria, 'Hunting', viewed 11 June 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0431 


Camping 

• fallow deer. 699 

The Committee received comparatively little evidence regarding the impact 

of hunting on the scale and intensity of bushfires and on the ability of 

relevant agencies to respond. 

The Gippsland Deerstalkers Association Inc. referred to the detailed 

knowledge of the Alpine terrain and its flora and fauna acquired by its 

members over many years. 700 Both the Gippsland Deerstalkers Association 

Inc. and the North East Deerstalkers Association expressed support for 

increased access to public land by various traditional land users. Mr Rod 

Newnham, Parks Victoria, stated that hunting had a negligible impact on 

bushfire prevention and suppression. 701 

In conclusion, the Committee notes the strong interest that recreational 

hunters have in effective land and fire management and finds that hunting 

has had a negligible impact upon the scale and intensity of recent fires. The 

Committee also notes that hunting on public land is a valuable source of 

local knowledge and, in common with other traditional land uses, plays an 

important role in sustaining the network of vehicle access tracks used in 

bushfire suppression. 

As with hunting, the Committee did not receive any evidence to suggest that 

camping contributes directly to the scale and intensity of bushfires or that it 

detracts from the ability of relevant agencies to respond. However, the 

Committee did receive evidence regarding the associated risks of campfires. 

Unlike the traditional land uses discussed above, the Committee received no 

significant evidence of a decline in access to public land for camping. 

The bushfire risks associated with campfires, which are a common but not 

universal feature of camping and which are not restricted to camping per se, 

are well recognised and addressed in various publications of land and fire 

management agencies. Both DSE and Parks Victoria have published 

Camping Codes which seek to regulate this risk. Parks Victoria has also 

published the following restrictions in relation to campfires in national parks: 

Fires may be lit only in fireplaces provided, or as directed by signs. No fires at all 

may be lit on days of Total Fire Ban. Gas or fuel stoves have less environmental 

impact and are preferred. Fires are not permitted in some parks. 

… 

No fires at all (including gas or fuel stoves in tents) may be lit on days of Total Fire 

Ban. 

699 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'What Can I Hunt?' viewed 11 June 2008, 

. 

700 Gippsland Deer Stalkers Association Inc., Submission, no. 26, 4 May 2007, p. 1. 


2007. 

189

RSCH.016.001.0432 


Apiary 

Such bans do not necessarily apply to the whole State; it's your responsibility to find 

out which Fire Ban district you're in, and whether a Total Fire Ban has been declared 

on a particular day. 702 

Both Parks Victoria and DSE acknowledged that campfires are a small but 

significant source of bushfires. 703 Mr Ken King, Executive Director, Land and 

Fire Management DSE, quantified the bushfire risk associated with 

campfires as follows: 

In terms of access, about 10 per cent of fires have been started by campfire escapes 

over the last 30 years, and that has been relatively consistent; that is in our data. I 

suppose the measure there is people who go around and use campfires. We do not 

have any data which would give an indication of whether there has been an increase 

in the number of people going out and lighting campfires, [and] therefore [whether] in 

relative terms it has diminished. 704 

In conclusion, the Committee notes that while campfires are a small but 

significant source of bushfires, it received no evidence to suggest that 

camping has had a significant impact on the scale and intensity of bushfires 

in recent years. While the presence of campers may present some 

complications for land and fire agencies during bushfire suppression 

operations, the Committee received no evidence to suggest that this 

challenge was any greater than that posed by the presence of other land 

users. Finally, the Committee notes that, as with the range of traditional land 

uses discussed above, access to public land for the purposes of camping 

also encourages the maintenance of a network of vehicle access tracks on 

public land. 

Although not specifically referred to in the terms of reference, apiary is a 

commercial activity which is especially vulnerable to the environmental 

damage caused by large bushfires and which was particularly adversely 

affected by the recent fires. 

Honey production in Victoria is largely reliant on access to native flora. 

Approximately 5,100 tonnes of honey is produced annually in Victoria, 

around 15.6 per cent of the national total, with a farm gate value of $7.9 

million in 1997/98. 705 

According to the Victorian Apiarists Association Inc. there are nearly 2,000 

registered beekeepers currently operating in Victoria, either part-time as 

hobbyists or as commercial producers of honey. 706 The Association notes 

190 

702 Parks Victoria, 'Looking After Our Parks', viewed 11 June 2008, 

. 


2007; K. King, Executive Director, Land and Fire Management, Department of Sustainability and 






706 Victorian Apiarists Association, Submission, no. 191, 5 June 2007, p. 1.

RSCH.016.001.0433 


that the industry is an important source of crop pollination for horticulture 

and agriculture, with a national benefit to crop yields which has been 

estimated at $2 billion each year. 707 The Association also notes that 

because around 85 per cent of Victorian honey production is obtained from 

eucalypt species “native forests on public and freehold land … play a critical 

role in maintaining prosperous commercial honeybee populations”. 708 The 

Association described the land and fire management knowledge held by 

Victoria’s apiarists as follows: 

Victorian beekeepers spend much of their working life in the forests of the state’s 

public lands and …[have] considerable experience in dealing with the threat and 

aftermath of fire events. 709 

This point was reiterated by the Sunraysia Apiarists Association, which 

stated that beekeepers are a valuable resource that could be used more 

extensively in fire management. 710 

According to the Gippsland Apiarists Association Inc., 201 apiary sites were 

affected by the Great Divide Complex South fire out of a total of 870 sites. 711 

The Association stated that the industry “desperately needs greater access 

to areas we are presently restricted and excluded from such as national and 

state parks”. 712 

The Committee received no evidence to suggest that apiarists have had a 

significant impact on the scale and intensity of bushfires in recent years. The 

Committee also notes that apiarists play an important role in maintaining the 

network of vehicle tracks on public land in the same way as general 4WD 

users outlined above. The Committee is particularly mindful of the pressures 

faced by apiarists following the recent fires and of the important role that the 

industry plays in agriculture. For these reasons, the Committee believes that 

the Government should consider all available means, consistent with 

conservation values, for increasing the access of apiarists to the public land 

estate. 


That the Victorian Government consider all available means, consistent with 

conservation values, for substantially increasing the access of apiarists to 

the public land estate. 




710 Sunraysia Apiarists Association, Submission, no. 220, 19 June 2007, p. 2. 

711 Gippsland Apiarists, Submission, no. 192B, 17 September 2007, p. 2. 

712 Gippsland Apiarists, Submission, no. 192B, 17 September 2007, p. 2. 

191

RSCH.016.001.0434 


192

RSCH.016.001.0435 

Chapter 6: Community and Stakeholder Engagement 

Chapter 

6 

Community and Stakeholder 

Engagement 

…fire management is a shared responsibility, one that must include local knowledge. 

Victoria’s emergency management arrangements build on a policy position that 

communities should not be passive recipients of services. They should be very active 

participants in their own safety planning and in the decision-making processes that 

surround their safety. This participative approach requires government, land 

managers and fire services to move beyond being experts to actually becoming 

facilitators who work with communities to support that community participation. It also 

requires that communities be responsible for taking up the opportunities to have their 

voices heard. The time for sitting back and believing that no change will occur, 

despite whatever input, is gone. There is a process, there is a willingness on the part 

of the CFA, DSE and Parks Victoria to seek and utilise the input of communities. It is 

a responsibility of communities to take those opportunities when they are provided. 713 

Introduction 

The majority of stakeholders who provided evidence to the Inquiry 

emphasised the importance of community engagement in developing 

appropriate public land management practices for the prevention and 

suppression of bushfires. A significant number of those stakeholders were 

also critical of aspects of the current approach to community engagement by 

DSE and its partner agencies. 

Community engagement is the subject of terms of reference 11 and 12. 

Term of reference number 12 requires the Committee to consider the 

involvement of local communities in the management of fire. Term of 

reference number 11 requires the Committee to consider whether additional 

measures are required to ensure that the skills, knowledge and interests of 

local communities, and of appropriate scientific expertise, are better 

represented in managing the bushfire risk on public land. 

In relation to scientific expertise, the Committee notes that the fire 

management processes of DSE and its partner agencies incorporate 

scientific research and findings from various organisations to a significant 

degree. Evidence was provided of DSE’s links with a range of scientific 

organisations including the Bushfire CRC; CSIRO; interstate and 



193

RSCH.016.001.0436 


international land and fire managers; and key academics. The Committee 

considers that these links represent an adequate level of scientific input into 

fire management processes. However, the Committee received evidence 

from a number of stakeholders questioning the validity of some science and 

suggesting that it was sometimes applied inflexibly. For example, some 

stakeholders noted that this was a particular problem with burn 

prescriptions. These stakeholders also highlighted the need for greater use 

of local knowledge. 714 The Committee notes that a certain level of scientific 

input is appropriate and necessary. However, the Committee agrees with 

those stakeholders who suggested that DSE could improve its approach to 

stakeholder engagement. More so, the Committee believes that the greater 

use of local knowledge may provide a more robust foundation for scientific 

analysis. 

As such, this chapter focuses on the representation of local communities in 

managing the bushfire risk on public land and their general involvement in 

fire prevention and mitigation. A number of measures for improvement in 

both of these areas are suggested. 

Although the Committee received evidence regarding the importance of 

community engagement in relation to both bushfire prevention and 

suppression, this chapter focuses primarily on engagement in bushfire 

prevention. This reflects the fact that the terms of reference focus on public 

land management practices as opposed to bushfire suppression and that a 

significant proportion of the evidence received by the Committee on this 

issue concerned prescribed burning. Moreover, while the Committee is 

mindful of the importance of community engagement in bushfire 

suppression, it also notes that the issue has been addressed by recent 

inquiries, including the Esplin Report and the Auditor-General’s Report of 

2003. 

This chapter also considers DSE’s current approach to community 

engagement in the preparation of fire planning documents: the Code of 

Practice, Fire Management Plans; and Fire Operations Plans and makes 

suggestions for improved transparency and accountability in relation to Fire 

Operations Plans. 

The crucial importance of the CFA as a conduit for local knowledge and of 

the need for increased community engagement in the interface between 

public and private land is also discussed. A number of changes are also 

suggested which would reinforce the approach which is currently being 

implemented through the Integrated Fire Management Planning Framework 

(IFMP). 

194 


Melbourne, 16 July 2007; S. Ramsay, President, Victorian Farmers Federation, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 2007; R. Grant, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 2007;A. 

Hooper, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 August 2007; B. Noble, Transcript of evidence, Heyfield, 1 

August 2008; M. and P. Coleman, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007; W. Eggleton, 

Hattah Association, Transcript of evidence, Ouyen, 11 September 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0437 


The Committee notes that references to community “engagement” and 

“consultation” are sometimes used interchangeably. However, the 

Committee considers that “engagement” more accurately describes the 

increasingly inclusive approach DSE and its partner agencies need to have 

in the management of land and fire. Moreover, land and fire management in 

Victoria is a year-round process which demands an ongoing dialogue 

between decision-makers, the community and stakeholders. 


The importance of effective community engagement in the management of 

public land for the prevention and suppression of bushfires was emphasised 

by the vast majority of stakeholders. While a number of stakeholders were 

supportive of the current approach by the land management agencies to 

community engagement, a significant number of stakeholders were also 

critical of the extent to which the agencies incorporated local input into both 

fire prevention and suppression practices. 

Concerns and suggestions for improvement 

The Committee begins this section by outlining some of the criticisms made 

by stakeholders of the current approach to community engagement by DSE 

and its partner agencies. The criticisms relate to both bushfire prevention 

and suppression, although as noted above, the subsequent discussion will 

focus primarily on the role of engagement in bushfire prevention. A number 

of suggestions for improvement by stakeholders are also outlined. 

Dr Tolhurst emphasised the importance of knowledge transfer, both from the 

community to fire agencies and within fire agencies, and argued that there 

had been a decline in this area in recent years: 

One of the things that I guess has happened in recent times is that the transfer of 

knowledge has become poorer even though we have got all this electronic transfer, 

we have got education and so on. But in fact within an organisation the transfer from 

people living in a community to people working in the forest, to people working in 

parks, to people in the bureaucracy, the knowledge transfer is in fact very poor, and 

so I think we need to change that whole paradigm. 

It is not a matter of having a lifelong experience in a particular area any more, we 

need to be able to actually transfer that knowledge between people with the 

knowledge. That comes down to community engagement as well as within 

organisations such as Parks Victoria or DSE or even the CFA... We really need to 

look at that knowledge transfer process. 715 

715 Dr K. Tolhurst, Senior Lecturer Fire Ecology and Management, School of Forest and Ecosystem 

Science, University of Melbourne, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 2007. 

195

RSCH.016.001.0438 


East Gippsand Wildfire Taskforce (EGWT) made the following criticisms in 

relation to community engagement by DSE and its partner agencies: 

• DSE and Parks Victoria have ignored local knowledge and skill 

regarding fuel reduction burning and wildfire suppression; 

• incident controllers and fire managers with little local knowledge are 

often brought in to manage fire events; and 

• local CFA are often sidelined by DSE managers who prefer to use 

their own crews. 716 

Timber Communities Australia argued that the input of the rural community 

and forest sector is often ignored and that engagement generally involves 

“telling rather than listening.” 717 TTV argued that local communities should 

have a greater role in the decision making with regard to fire management. 

Mr David Packham of the People’s Review of Bushfires argued that fire 

management planning had become overly centralised in comparison to 

previous decades. Mr Packham stated that the functional relationships 

between the CFA and Victorian Forests Commission during the 1950s and 

1960s had worked more effectively than the current arrangements because 

they had allowed a greater influence for local knowledge, particularly in 

relation to the conduct of prescribed burning. 718 

The Friends of Howqua Hills described the involvement of local communities 

in fire prevention and suppression as essential and made the following 

criticisms in relation to the level and quality of community engagement: 

• local cattlemen demonstrated a significantly greater knowledge of fire 

behaviour than DSE or CFA staff during recent fires; 

• locals have encountered hostility to community input during 

community meetings with land management agencies; 

• official attempts to involve the local community were ‘information 

sessions’, with local experts treated with ‘arrogance and contempt’; 

and 

• the response to the recent fires relied heavily on the internet, which 

overwhelmed the local telephone exchange. When the phone lines 

were burnt, the community was left without information. 

Omeo/Tambo Valley CWA Group emphasized the need to improve the 

integration of local knowledge in “fire defence plans”. The group noted that 

the coordination of fire suppression by people who are unfamiliar with an 

196 


717 Timber Communities Australia, Submission, no. 214, 16 June 2007, p. 13. 

718 D. Packham, The People's Review of Bushfires in Victoria Since 2000, Transcript of evidence, 

Melbourne, 19 November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0439 


area can result in significant delays and lost opportunities. An example 

provided by the group was the refusal by fire agencies to allow locals to lead 

crews to known access points to fight the fires. 719 

Mr Graeme Stoney provided evidence of similar experience by locals in the 

Howqua Hills, citing reports of local DSE staff with experience and local 

knowledge being overruled by DSE staff from outside the area. 720 

Evidence provided by Mr Alex Hooper echoed Mr Stoney’s concerns, 

arguing that there is minimal opportunity for real input to incident control 

from local volunteers, with CFA volunteers having little influence on the 

decisions that are made. 721 

The Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) suggested a number of practical 

measures to increase the level of community engagement in relation to both 

fire prevention and suppression, including: 

• that government agencies investigate more efficient methods of 

alerting the community and affected industry about upcoming 

prescribed burning; 

• improved definition of the important assets within a community; 

• requiring suppression strike teams to listen to residents with local 

knowledge; 

• increasing the public availability of fire management plans; and 

• better support for volunteers and the employers of volunteers. 722 

The VFF also emphasised the need to improve community engagement with 

the various groups involved in traditional uses of public land, such as: timber 

harvesting; grazing; four-wheel driving; hunting; mining; and prospecting. 

The VFF emphasised the importance of such groups as important 

repositories of local and practical fire management knowledge and argued 

that while all of these groups have a strong interest in preventing bushfires 

on public land, they have each been removed from the relevant decisionmaking 

processes, to varying degrees. VFF also argued that access to 

public land by a number of these groups had been restricted over time, 

exacerbating the loss of local resources and local knowledge. 723 

719 Omeo/Tambo Valley CWA Group, Submission, no. 108, 24 May 2007, p. 1. 

720 G. Stoney, Submission, no. 252, 26 November 2007, p. 5. 

721 A. Hooper, Submission, no. 124, 25 May 2007, p. 1. 

722 Victorian Farmers Federation, Submission, no. 112, 25 May 2007. 


2007. 

197

RSCH.016.001.0440 


Mr Charlie Schroeder argued that there is a need to improve the 

engagement skills of DSE staff through training to ensure better relations 

with the local community. Mr Schroeder stated that this would ensure that 

DSE staff were able to “interact and not react” with the local community. 724 

A number of stakeholders were critical of the effectiveness of public 

meetings, particularly in relation to the determination of prescribed burning 

targets and priorities for a local area. 725 The Emergency Services 

Commissioner also emphasised the need to involve local communities in 

bushfire mitigation in a way that “goes well beyond public meetings”. 726 

One suggestion for increasing the level of community input beyond that 

currently provided by public meetings, which was provided by the People’s 

Review of Bushfires in Victoria Since 2000 (“the People’s Review”), involved 

the establishment of a state-wide peak fire forum to give members of the 

public representation in the decision making process with respect to 

prescribed burning. This issue is considered in later in this chapter. 

Concerns were also raised by some stakeholders regarding the quality of 

engagement during the post-fire rehabilitation phase. For example, the West 

Gippsland Catchment Management Authority (WGCMA) argued that the 

rehabilitation that had been undertaken by departmental staff without 

engagement with WGCMA was inadequate and needed to be redone. 727 

Support for the current approach to community engagement 

A number of stakeholders also expressed support for the current approach 

to community engagement by DSE and its partner agencies. For example, 

La Trobe City Council, expressed confidence in DSE’s approach to 

engagement and collaboration with external stakeholders on the conduct of 

prescribed burns. The Council also informed the Committee that community 

engagement had greatly improved in recent times. 728 Wellington Shire 

Council, however, while generally supportive of DSE’s approach to 

community engagement, argued that local communities require more 

support. 

V/Line was similarly positive in describing its engagement experience with 

fire management agencies, describing recent prescribed burns in rail areas 

as having been conducted with a level of professionalism and good 

engagement. 729 Bushwalking Victoria described local communities as well 

catered for with regard to representation in the management of bushfire risk 

on public land, but noted that there is always room for improvement. 730 

198 

724 C. Schroeder, Submission, no. 76, 23 May 2007, p. 3. 

725 See for example: Grampians Asset Protection, Submission, no. 167, 1 June 2007, p. 6. 

726 Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner, Submission, no. 143, 28 May 2007, p. 25. 


728 Latrobe City Council, Submission, no. 58, 15 May 2007, p. 5. 

729 V/Line Passenger Pty Ltd, Submission, no. 109, 25 May 2007, p. 6. 

730 Bushwalking Victoria, Submission, no. 65, 18 May 2007, pp. 5-6.

RSCH.016.001.0441 


The Committee notes that those stakeholders who expressed support for 

the current approach to community engagement by land and fire 

management agencies were generally public institutions and agencies which 

currently enjoy a level of year-round engagement. The Committee notes that 

the lower levels of satisfaction expressed by general members of the public 

may be due in large part to the absence of such year round engagement. 

The importance of community engagement 

A number of stakeholders argued that effective community engagement 

requires the development of reciprocal relationships, with some problems 

arising from a lack of involvement by communities. 

The Rural City of Wangaratta informed the Committee that it had noted a 

low level of community attendance at some public meetings organised by 

DSE. 731 Mr Kenneth Baxter, who has been involved with the Stratford CFA 

for the past 40 years, also informed the Committee that it can be difficult to 

achieve a sufficient level of involvement from local communities because 

members of the public are less interested in fire management during times 

when the community is not in obvious danger. 732 

Mr John Schauble, a Volunteer Captain with the Sassafras-Ferny Creek 

Brigade, of the Country Fire Authority expressed the problem as follows: 

On balance, I would say we are comparatively well engaged, but for the most part I 

would still estimate that only something like about 20 per cent of the population is 

actively involved in thinking about and doing things to do with bushfires…That has 

important impacts, because one of the critical differences for our area, of course, is 

that, once fires start, they spread very rapidly and the ridges are quite sharp. In other 

places they are able to hold community meetings and give other warnings, whereas 

in our area the reality is that, unless local communities are collectively and 

individually quite prepared throughout the fire danger period there is significant 

potential for life and property loss once a bushfire starts. 733 

Mr John Schauble also referred to the challenges posed by demographic 

change in maintaining community engagement with fire management: 

One of the issues we have is that 25 per cent of the population changes every five 

years, so it is an ongoing challenge for us to actually maintain levels of community 

awareness about bushfire. 734 

The Committee observed a strong desire for, and commitment to, 

engagement in fire management in country areas. The Committee considers 

that any lack of community interest in engagement is apparently a greater 

problem in more urbanized areas and in regions with a higher concentration 

of “absentee” and “week-end” landowners and of residents who regularly 

731 Rural City of Wangaratta, Submission, no. 182, 1 June 2007, p. 2. 

732 K. Baxter, Submission, no. 73, 22 May 2007, p. 1. 

733 J. Schauble, Captain, Sassafras/Ferny Creek Brigade, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of 

evidence, Warburton, 8 October 2007. 

734 J. Schauble, Captain, Sassafras/Ferny Creek Brigade, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of 

evidence, Warburton, 8 October 2007. 

199

RSCH.016.001.0442 


commute long distances for employment (as discussed later in this chapter). 

The Committee also notes that a level of dissatisfaction may have 

developed in communities which have experienced a particular failure of 

meaningful engagement by land and fire management agencies in previous 

years. 

Discussion and findings 

The Committee believes that it is crucial to achieve an appropriate balance 

between community input and the informed and specialist views of staff 

within DSE and its partner agencies. The Committee is also mindful that 

engagement represents a process rather than an outcome, which involves 

input into decision-making rather than decision-making itself. 735 It follows 

that participants in any engagement process may not always be satisfied 

with the decisions that are made. However, the Committee notes that 

community satisfaction in decision-making can be significantly enhanced by 

maximising the opportunities for meaningful engagement. 

The Committee has found that there is a need to improve the current 

standard of community and stakeholder engagement by DSE and its partner 

agencies in land and fire management, in order to create a culture of 

continuous engagement. Improvements are required in a number of areas. 

First, there should be greater transparency and accountability within DSE 

and its partner agencies. Second, there should be an increased emphasis 

by land and fire management agencies on continuously informing and 

updating stakeholders and the community of, and reasons for, specific land 

and fire management activities. Finally, DSE and its partner agencies should 

significantly increase the opportunities and mechanisms available for 

stakeholder and community input into land and fire management. Such 

mechanisms should go beyond the current reliance on community meetings 

and information sessions. 

In the remainder of this chapter, the Committee outlines the existing 

engagement measures employed by DSE and its partner agencies and 

discusses a number of measures which have the potential to produce 

significant improvements in each of the above areas. 

200 

735 Victorian Local Governance Association, 'Definitions', viewed 20 June 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0443 


Finding 6.1: 

The Committee finds that there is a need to improve the standard of 

community and stakeholder engagement by the Department of Sustainability 

and Environment and its partner agencies in land and fire management, in 

order to create a culture of continuous engagement. Measures to achieve this 

should include: 

• greater transparency and accountability within the Department of 

Sustainability and Environment and its partner agencies; 

• an increased emphasis on continuously informing stakeholders and the 

community of, and the reasons for, specific land and fire management 

activities; and 

• an increase in the opportunities and mechanisms for stakeholder and 

community input. 

Community Engagement by DSE and its Partner Agencies 

Introduction 

The Code of Practice provides the basis for community engagement by DSE 

and its partner agencies in relation to fire management planning on public 

land. It provides that fire management “must be undertaken in a participative 

manner where the responsibility for reducing the likelihood and 

consequence of wildfire is appropriately shared between public and private 

land holders and managers”. 736 

The Code of Practice also places an obligation on DSE to plan fire 

management on public land in accordance with the following “community 

partnership principles”: 

• community members to be appropriately involved at the local, regional and State 

level; 

• processes to be open and accessible to people of different backgrounds and cultures 

(especially Indigenous communities); 

• to be transparent and accountable with appropriate reporting back to the community; 

• local community knowledge and information to be actively sought, respectfully 

managed, and used to inform decision-making, where appropriate; and 

• recognises that fire management outcomes are maximised when public and private 

landholders work cooperatively. 737 





201

RSCH.016.001.0444 


The requirement that DSE involve community members in fire management 

at State, regional and local levels is reflected in the community engagement 

arrangements for the Code of Practice, Fire Protection Plans and Fire 

Operations Plans, respectively, each of which is discussed in this section. 

DSE and its partner agencies have also conducted research which has 

resulted in a range of community engagement resources, such as the 

Community Engagement about fire on public land: Plan to Improve 2005– 

2009. These resources are also outlined in this section. 

The Code of Practice 

The preparation of the current Code of Practice was subject to a process of 

community engagement during a number of months and involved over 30 

meetings throughout the State. 738 DSE established a Fire Code Review 

Team which released a draft of the Code of Practice for public comment 

which received over 170 written submissions from organisations and 

individuals in response. 739 The Review Team worked through the 

submissions, with the assistance of technical advisers, and incorporated a 

significant amount of the feedback in the final document. 740 

Fire Management Plans 

The Code imposes the following general community engagement obligations 

on DSE with respect to the preparation of Fire Management Plans: 

• involve public and private land managers and specialists in flora, pest plants, fauna, 

park management, forestry, land and water management, historic and Indigenous 

heritage, and fire management, in accordance with community partnerships 

principles; and 

• consult with the Country Fire Authority, and other agencies with a major interest in 

fire protection, relevant non-government organisations and the wider community. 741 

The Code also defines the specific procedures to be observed by DSE in the 

preparation or revision of each Fire Management Plan. As can be seen 

below, the procedures provide for community engagement at a number of 

stages: 

• develop a community engagement plan in accordance with known local concerns 

and the principles of community partnership; 

• table the draft Plan for discussion at Regional and Municipal Fire Prevention 

Committee meetings to ensure it is integrated with planning in the Country Area of 

Victoria; 

202 









RSCH.016.001.0445 


• make the draft Plan available on the Department’s website, at the Department’s 

central office and the field office responsible for preparation, for public comment for a 

minimum period of eight weeks; 

• invite public comment by advertising in the State’s major newspapers, local papers in 

the area covered by the Fire Management Plan, on the Department’s website and by 

letter to industry and community groups known to be interested in subject and/or 

location; 

• consider comments received from the community and respond in accordance with 

community partnerships principles; and 

• following analysis of comments received, present a final Plan for endorsement to 

senior managers with statewide responsibility for fire, forestry, parks, flora, fauna and 

fisheries, Crown Land, heritage and catchment and land management before final 

approval is given by the Secretary. 742 

Fire Operations Plans 

Background 

DSE also conducts a process of community engagement as part of the 

annual preparation of Fire Operations Plans and, to a lesser degree, when 

making amendments to the plan. Unlike Fire Management Plans, the public 

engagement requirements for Fire Operations Plans are not stated in the 

Code of Practice but in the Fire Operations Plan itself. However, the Code 

does specify that Fire Operations Plans must be consistent with the 

applicable Fire Management Plan and that, where possible, DSE must 

consult with the community and relevant specialists before undertaking any 

prescribed burns which were not initially included in the Fire Operations 

Plan. 743 

Community and stakeholder engagement in the preparation of Fire 

Operations Plans has two main stages. The first stage involves the 

preparation of draft Fire Operations Plans by DSE and its partner agencies 

in consultation with key stakeholders, including: the local and regional CFA; 

relevant Catchment Management Authorities; relevant municipalities; local 

indigenous community representatives and registered aboriginal parties 

(defined in the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006); and relevant industry 

representatives (e.g. apiarists). 744◊ DSE may also hold one-on-one meetings 

with key local community groups following the preparation of proposed new 

burn maps. 745 





744 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Gippsland Fire Operations Plan 2007/08 -2009/10 

(2007), Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007, p. 5 and Attachment 1. 

◊ The Committee was advised that although there are minor differences between Districts and 

Regions in the community engagement process for FOPs, this two-stage process is common to all 

FOPs: DSE, Personal communication (email 14 May 2008). 


(2007), Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007., Section 1, Attachment 1. 

203

RSCH.016.001.0446 


During the second stage of engagement, the draft Fire Operations Plans are 

made available for public comment, which may include: suggested changes 

to proposed burns; the proposal of additional burns; and comments on 

related fire management activities such as slashing and works on tracks and 

bridges. 746 In 2007, DSE held a total of 18 community meetings in rural 

areas across Victoria during the month of August to provide members of the 

public with an opportunity to comment on the draft Fire Operations Plans for 

their Fire District and to discuss more general fire planning issues. 747 Given 

the limited number of meetings, the large number of Fire Districts (currently 

24), and the short time frame available for public participation, the 

Committee considers that the number of community meetings during the 

public consultation period should be increased to a minimum of one meeting 

for each Fire District, with the possibility of repeat visits for particular areas. 


That in relation to Fire Operations Plans, the Department Sustainability and 

Environment extends the number of community meetings during the public 

consultation period to a minimum of one meeting for each Fire District, with 

the possibility of repeat visits to particular areas. 

The current Fire Operations Plan for Gippsland – a compilation of the plans 

for the 10 Fire Districts within the Gippsland Region – contains a summary 

of the annual public consultation process, which includes the following 

requirements: 

• draft Fire Operations Plans are to be available for public viewing and 

comment for a minimum of 28 days (e.g. the month of August); 

• “appropriate and timely” advertising of the engagement period in local 

newspapers; 

• draft and final Fire Operations Plans are to be made available at 

District and Regional offices and on DSE’s external website; 

• a range of organisations and representatives are to be advised in 

writing that the draft Fire Operations Plan is available for comment, 

including: Regional Managers of PV, DPI and VicForests; the local 

and regional CFA; relevant Catchment Management Authorities; 

relevant municipalities; local indigenous community representatives; 

registered aboriginal parties under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006; 

relevant industry representatives (e.g. apiarists); and others as locally 

appropriate; 

• all written public comments must be considered and a response 

provided (depending on the nature of the comments the response 

204 

746 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Community Meetings - Fire Operations Planning', 

viewed 26 April 2008, . 

747 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Community Meetings - Fire Operations Planning', 

viewed 26 April 2008, .

RSCH.016.001.0447 


may be written or verbal. The plan also contains a record of 

community engagement throughout the year, which includes details 

of issues raised by organisations and members of the public and the 

actions taken by DSE in response.); and 

• the preparation process concludes in early October following final 

endorsement by land managers and the DSE Regional Manager and 

the subsequent approval and signature of the DSE Regional 

Director. 748 

The current Gippsland Fire Operations Plan records a number of 

amendments to the draft plan in response to public comments received 

during the engagement period. For example, a number of additional burns 

were scheduled for fuel reduction in specific areas at the request of 

community groups. 

DSE also engages in community engagement in relation to the amendment 

of Fire Operations Plans; that is, the modification, rescheduling or addition of 

burns in an existing plan. The circumstances in which such engagement is 

required – and those in which it is not – as set out in the Gippsland Fire 

Operations Plan, include: 

• additional burns – the addition of burns for the current year which 

were not included in the current Fire Operations Plan or the plan for 

the previous year is subject to a period of public engagement unless 

the burn represents a “substantial and demonstrable benefit”; and 

there are time constraints that would jeopardise the completion of the 

burn; and there is a low level of community sensitivity to the burn; 

• additional “small” burns – for example burns which are expected to 

have minimal community impact and which are associated with works 

such as weed removal are not subject to the Fire Operations Plan 

process and therefore may not involve a community engagement. 

The Gippsland Fire Operations Plan states that such burns would 

generally be no larger than 500 metres square in area; 

• altered burn boundaries – community engagement is not required for 

increases of less than 25 per cent of the planned burn area. For 

increases which exceed 25 per cent of the planned area or where the 

additional area is outside of the original burn area, the Regional 

Manager Fire has the discretion to decide whether public 

engagement is required. Relevant indigenous community 

representatives must be consulted if the planned increases involve 

any earthworks; 

• carry over burns – burns from the previous Fire Operations Plan may 

be included in the current Fire Operations Plan with the approval of 


(2007), Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007, pp. Section 1, pp.4-6 & 

Attachment 1. 

205

RSCH.016.001.0448 


the Fire Management Officer. However, the inclusion of burns from 

earlier Fire Operations Plans may be subject to public engagement at 

the discretion of the Regional Manager, Fire; 

• carrying forward burns – any second or third year burn contained in a 

Fire Operations Plan may be brought forward to the current year with 

the approval of the Fire Management Officer. In other words, the 

entire three years of a Fire Operations Plan may be burnt or treated 

during the first year. There is no requirement to engage in community 

engagement in bringing such burns forward; and 

• removing burns from the Fire Operations Plan / Rescheduling burns – 

burns may be removed or rescheduled to a future Fire Operations 

Plan due to: the discovery of significant values such as rare flora or 

fauna; an under-representation of age classes for fire tolerant EVCs; 

or following the impact of wildfire on the area in which a burn is 

proposed. There is no general community engagement requirement 

for the removal or rescheduling of burns. However, the Fire 

Operations Plan states that the community member or stakeholder 

who nominated the burn should be notified and provided with reasons 

as to why the burn has been removed or rescheduled. 749 

Discussion and recommendations 

The Committee notes that Fire Operations Plans are effectively the “delivery 

tools” for the strategies contained in Fire Management Plans. 750 Moreover, 

since Fire Operations Plans provide the operational template for the 

implementation of DSE’s fire prevention and preparedness works, they are 

also the most direct means through which the community may influence the 

fuel reduction and ecological burning programs. 751 In this section, the 

Committee suggests some measures to enhance the level and effectiveness 

of community engagement in the preparation of Fire Operations Plans. 

Although the Code contains no requirements in relation to the annual 

engagement process for Fire Operations Plans, it does specify the 

documentation that is to be made publicly available throughout the year. 

Under the Code, DSE is required to “make forward planning schedules and 

maps for prescribed burning and new works available for public inspection at 

a Departmental office within the planning area (i.e. the District), and on the 

Department’s website”. 752 While it is unclear whether this requirement refers 

to the finalised Fire Operations Plans in their entirety or to selected 

components of the plan, the Committee notes that Fire Operations Plans are 

effectively unavailable on DSE’s website. 

206 


(2007), Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2007, p. 7. 







RSCH.016.001.0449 


Although it is possible for members of the public to construct a map of the 

burns planned for a particular Fire District using Fireplan – an interactive 

software application on DSE’s website – a degree of familiarity with both the 

Internet and the application itself is required which may effectively limit or 

prevent access by a significant proportion of the public. The Committee 

considers that Fireplan is an important tool and is not suggesting that the 

application be replaced. Rather, the Committee considers that public access 

would be significantly improved by the provision of small sized additional 

maps, possibly in PDF format, which show the planned burns for each Fire 

District and which can be downloaded from a single prominent webpage in a 

prepared format which requires no data manipulation by the user. The 

Committee is unaware of any reason why printed copies of such maps could 

not also be made available in A4 or A3 format to members of the public on 

request and free of charge. 

The second crucial Fire Operations Plan component which is not available 

on DSE’s website is the forward planning schedules for prescribed burns 

and associated works, although this is clearly required under the Code. 753 In 

the current Gippsland Fire Operations Plan, the schedules comprise both a 

“regional summary” and a “district burns list” for the years 2007/08 to 

2009/10. The “district burns list” is particularly important in the interpretation 

of the maps for a given Fire District. While the map shows the location and 

nominated year for a given burn, the schedules provide: the season; name; 

further location details; area; fuel management zone; and responsible land 

manager for a given burn. The Committee is unaware of any reason why the 

“district burns list”, or its equivalents in other Fire Operations Plans, should 

not be available on DSE’s website as required by the Code. The Committee 

is also unaware of any reason why the “district burns list”, or its equivalents, 

should not also be available to members of the public in hardcopy on 

request and free of charge. 

As such, with the exception of private information provided by members of 

the community, the Committee believes that finalised Fire Operations Plans 

should be publicly available in their entirety and that this should be clearly 

stated in the Code of Practice. 

The Committee also notes that the provisions for the variation and 

amendment of burns planned for any given year in a Fire Operations Plans 

may have the potential to confuse the public regarding the progress of the 

prescribed burning program. Examples include the bringing forward of 

burns, into the current year, which are nominally scheduled for years two 

and three and the postponement, to subsequent years, of burns scheduled 

for year one. The Committee considers that in the interests of transparency 

and accountability, the public should be notified of all such variations to the 

scheduling of burns under a Fire Operations Plan. All variations should 

appear on DSE’s website at the time of the change and should be included 



207

RSCH.016.001.0450 


in the Fire Operations Plan for the following year as an addition to the 

information currently provided in the district burns list. 

Finally, the Committee received evidence that there is a need for DSE to 

publish information about planned and impending burns more prominently 

on its website. The Committee notes that while DSE’s website does contain 

a webpage which is dedicated to planned and active burns, it would be 

preferable for a link to this information to be placed in a prominent position 

on the homepage of the site. 


That finalised Fire Operations Plans be made publicly available in their 

entirety (with the exception of any private information) on the Department of 

Sustainability and Environment’s website and in hard-copy, and that this 

requirement be clearly stated in future Codes of Practice. This should include 

the “district burns list”, or its future equivalents, and a map which shows the 

corresponding burns for each Fire District. Each map should be provided in a 

format which can be downloaded directly from the Department’s website 

without the need for further data manipulation by the user. An identical 

hardcopy version of the map for each Fire District should be also be available 

to members of the public on request and free of charge. 


That the details of any variation or amendment of a Fire Operations Plan, 

including: the carrying forward or postponement of burns within the threeyear 

period covered by a Fire Operations Plan; the carry over, removal or 

rescheduling of burns between past, present and future Fire Operations 

Plans; and the alteration of burn boundaries (including alterations of less 

than 25 per cent); should appear on the Department of Sustainability and 

Environment’s website at the time of the change and be included in the Fire 

Operations Plan for the following year. 


That all information pertaining to current and planned prescribed burns be 

published more prominently on the Department of Sustainability and 

Environment’s website, with a single prominent link to this material on the 

website homepage. 


That a process of year round community engagement in the preparation of 

Fire Operations Plans be established. In addition a record of year round 

community engagement, as contained in the Gippsland Fire Operations Plan, 

should be a requirement of all Fire Operations Plans. 

208

RSCH.016.001.0451 


The Country Fire Authority 

The CFA is a volunteer-based emergency service organisation with 

approximately 58,000 volunteer members, who are supported by over 400 

career fire fighters and officers, and over 700 career support and 

administrative staff. CFA’s area of responsibility encompasses rural Victoria, 

and the provincial cities and towns (with the exception of State forests and 

national parks). CFA has over 1,200 brigades across nine CFA Areas which 

are further divided into 20 Regions. 754 

A number of stakeholders described the CFA as a repository of local 

knowledge regarding all aspects of bushfire management and an important 

avenue for local improvement in bushfire prevention and supression. 755 The 

Committee also received evidence regarding the relationship between DSE 

and CFA in the management of bushfire prevention and suppression in the 

interface between public and private land. Mr Ewan Waller Chief Officer, 

Fire and Emergency Management, DSE, informed the Committee that while 

DSE now regularly utilises local knowledge during the immediate planning 

and conduct of prescribed burns, there is also an increasing emphasis on 

the integration of local knowledge through the CFA: 

…the other area I am pretty keen to work on in the future, as touched on by Russell 

Rees from the CFA, is fuel reduction burning, bringing local knowledge, particularly 

the CFA again into that process as well when we are doing burns. The local people 

are right beside us when we are doing burns, in the planning and in the actual 

execution… but I would like to see it reinforced and part of everyday practice. 756 

Mr Ian Voigt, Regional Manger South West, DSE, informed the Committee 

of recent collaboration between DSE and the CFA in the conduct of 

prescribed burning, while noting the importance of adequate preparation as 

a means of addressing the potential for legal liability in the event of an 

escaped burn: 

We have done more joint work with the CFA, as we heard before, and we have tried 

some on joint public-private land. There is something of a challenge there around 

legal responsibilities. It is all very well until something goes wrong. That is when you 

have to prepare and manage for the event of something not quite working out how 

you thought it would, not just if it all goes well. But it is something that we would like 

to do more of, and in fact it is essential because as I said a lot of times the private 

land is heavy bush, just the same as the public land that we are protecting, and it 

makes no sense to stop at that line in a lot of cases. 757 

754 Country Fire Authority, 'About CFA', viewed 14 May 2008, 

. 

755 See for example: E. Waller, Chief Officer, Fire and Emergency Management, Department of 

Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007; Bushwalking Victoria, 

Submission, no. 65, 18 May 2007, p. 6; East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce, Submission, no. 63, 18 

May 2007, p. 3. 





209

RSCH.016.001.0452 


Mr Russell Rees, CFA suggested that local knowledge could be further 

integrated into the prescribed burning program by increasing the CFA’s role, 

throughout the state, in identifying those areas which should be subject to 

prescribed burning and those which should not: 

There are some locations across the state where CFA people have been intimately 

and regularly involved in both the decision-making process of what part of… the bush 

gets burnt and what part does not, and there are some places where there has been 

very little engagement up until very recent times…the people who live in the area 

should be working with the people who are custodians of the land — that is, DSE — 

to describe, prescribe and undertake the sort of work that is needed to protect 

everybody, treating the land for the benefit of both public and private estate. 758 

… 

I would not see CFA people getting extensively involved in fuel reduction programs 

deep in the forest, but I would see them being very active participants and indeed 

taking almost total ownership in some instances of public land fuel reduction 

activities, depending on where they are. 759 

The weight of evidence, including the Committee’s various site visits 

throughout Victoria, reinforced the Committee’s view that the CFA is an 

invaluable repository of local knowledge. The Committee’s view that the 

CFA enjoys robust and collaborative relationships with DSE and its partner 

agencies was also confirmed. The Committee found that overall, DSE and 

its partner agencies increasingly draw upon the local knowledge held within, 

and uniquely accessible to, the CFA in managing the bushfire risk in the 

interface between public and private land, including the planning of 

prescribed burning. 

There are two further areas in which the CFA makes an invaluable 

contribution to community engagement in land and fire management in 

Victoria. The first of these is as a provider of information, resources and 

programs to local communities, a role which is outlined in the following 

section. The second area, which is likely to significantly enhance community 

engagement at a local level in the future, is CFA’s role as the lead agency in 

the implementation of the Integrated Fire Management Planning Framework 

(IFMP) framework (discussed later in this chapter). 

Resources and programs 

In this section, the Committee outlines some of the community engagement 

resources and programs which have been developed by Victoria’s land and 

fire management agencies and the CFA. 

The CFA holds community meetings throughout the State each summer to 

educate the public about the minimisation of bushfire hazards. These 

meetings also provide an opportunity for members of the community to refer 

their concerns to the CFA, such as the need for prescribed burning in 

particular areas. The CFA also conducts a bushfire safety program known 

210 


759 R. Rees, Chief Officer, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 4 June 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0453 


as “Community Fireguard”, which is designed to assist residents in planning 

for bushfires and to manage their own fire risk. The program is designed to 

encourage residents to work together and includes the following core 

aspects: 

• fire behaviour; 

• personal survival; 

• house survival; 

• street walk; 

• fire protection equipment; and 

• developing personal and household bushfire survival plans. 760 

DSE has produced two guidebooks to assist fire staff who work with 

communities in regional Victoria. Community Engagement About Fire on 

Public Land – Plan to Improve (“the Plan to Improve”) and A Practical Guide 

address the recommendations of the Esplin Report for greater input of local 

knowledge and greater community involvement in fire planning and 

management. 761 

The Plan to Improve was prepared by the Fire and Emergency Management 

Committee, with representatives drawn from DSE, PV and DPI. The Project 

Team and Reference Group also included representatives of CFA and DHS. 

It includes research findings into community expectations for effective 

community engagement with fire agencies. The Plan to Improve includes the 

following key findings: 

• the community wants genuine, timely engagement that takes account of 

local circumstances and issues and allows input before public land fire 

managers have finalised their position; 

• community engagement for fire needs to extend beyond its successful 

response strategies and be part of its activities 365 days of the year; 

• the Alpine fires showed how effective DSE and Parks Victoria’s 

communication processes can be during an incident. The organisations 

need to develop systems that embed this successful model in community 

engagement for all fire events; 

760 Country Fire Authority, 'Community Meetings', viewed 20 June 2008, 

.;Country Fire Authority, 

'Community Fireguard', viewed 9 May 2008, . 

761 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Community Engagement About Fire on Public 

Land', viewed 7 May 2008, . 

211

RSCH.016.001.0454 


• DSE and Parks Victoria’s internal structures and processes can have a 

significant negative impact on its community relationships by being 

complex, frustrating and lengthy. 762 

DSE’s A Practical Guide is designed to provide practical steps to help staff 

identify the appropriate type of engagement for their activity or project; to 

understand public expectations in relation to community engagement; and 

assessment tools for the success of engagement activities. 763 

Both guidebooks are complemented by DSE’s the Effective Engagement: 

Building Relationships with Community and Other Stakeholders Kit and the 

Effective Engagement Planning Tool. 764 

As the Committee has noted above, a significant number of stakeholders 

expressed the view that the current approach to community engagement by 

DSE and its partner agencies involves an over-reliance on public meetings. 

While the Committee welcomes the obvious improvement in community 

engagement by DSE and its partner agencies in recent years it has also 

found that room for improvement remains. One suggestion for increasing the 

level of community engagement in a way which has the potential to provide 

greater community input into the decision making process was provided to 

the Committee by the People’s Review of Bushfires in Victoria Since 2000 

(“the People’s Review”). In its submission to the Inquiry, the People’s 

Review stated that it had found a “major gulf between on-ground local 

expertise and knowledge on the one hand and DSE, PV and (to a lesser 

extent) the CFA on the other…[which]…results in some serious problems in 

fire prevention and suppression”. The People’s Review made the following 

recommendations to address this situation: 

• the establishment (by the community rather than Government) of a 

state-wide peak fire forum for the people, to be known as the 

People’s Fire Forum; 

• the formulation and review of fire prevention and suppression policy 

by a fire policy group, consisting of DSE, CFA, PV and representation 

by the People’s Fire Forum; and 

• that prescribed burning groups be established, with a minimum local 

community membership of 40 per cent, to determine the targets, 

timing, location and accountability arrangements for prescribed 

burning. 765 

212 

762 Department of Sustainability and Environment, A Plan to Improve 2005-2009: Community 

Engagement About Fire on Public Land, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 

2005, p. 17. 





765 T. Barker, Peoples review of Bushfires in Victoria since 2000, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 

19 November 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0455 


The Committee considers that the establishment of a state-wide forum for 

the purposes recommended by the People’s Forum does have merit. 

However, the Committee also notes that there is significant potential to 

increase community input into bushfire policy and planning – including 

prescribed burning – through existing and emerging resources and 

programs. The IFMP framework (discussed below in this chapter) is notable 

in this regard since it has a primary goal of facilitating community input into 

fire prevention and suppression at a municipal, regional and state level. 

There is also significant scope for increased community input into prescribed 

burning through the community meetings conducted by CFA and through a 

possible expansion of CFA’s Community Fireguard” program (both of which 

are discussed above in this chapter). 

Finding 6.2: 

That the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework, Country Fire 

Authority community meetings and the expansion of the Country Fire 

Authority’s “Community Fireguard”, have significant potential to increase 

community input into the planning and policy development for bushfire 

prevention and suppression, including prescribed burning. 

The interface between public and private land 


The management of the interface between public and private land was 

raised as an issue of particular concern by the vast majority of stakeholders 

who provided evidence to the Committee. Management of the interface is of 

particular importance for the owners of both farming and residential 

properties. 

The importance of land management practices in interface areas is 

highlighted in the Code which states that that there is a “need for integrated 

management of risks and impacts between both public and adjoining private 

land”. 766 

As the Committee has previously noted, the Secretary of DSE has a duty to 

conduct proper and sufficient works for the prevention and suppression of 

fire in every State forest and national park and on all protected public land 

(under Section 62(2) of the Forests Act 1958). This duty is supported by 

various legislated powers for DSE officers, a number of which are relevant 

to managing the risk of fire in the interface between public and private land. 

These powers include: 

• the power to direct in writing that the owner/occupier of property 

within 1.5 kilometres of the boundary of state forest, national park or 



213

RSCH.016.001.0456 


a protected public place remove, destroy or abate a hazard on that 

land (section 65(1) of the Forests Act 1958); 

• the power to direct that neighbours carry out (prevention or control) 

works within 50 metres of the boundary similar to works conducted by 

DSE on the adjoining public land (section 65(1) of the Forests Act 

1958); 

• the duty to take control of any wildfire on public land and, in the 

absence of a CFA officer, in the country area of Victoria, (there are 

reciprocal obligations for CFA officers on public land.) (section 33(2) 

of the Country Fire Authority Act 1958); and 

• the power to order the extinguishment of any fire within 3 kilometres 

of public land (section 63(3) of the Forests Act 1958). 767 

DSE also has the power to declare a “Prohibited Period” in the “Fire 

Protected Area”. The period applies to private property within 1.5 kilometres 

of a park, forest or public land in Gippsland, the North East and South West 

Victoria (the “Fire Protected Area”). The Prohibited Period is generally 

declared for these areas at the same time as the Fire Danger Period (which 

applies to all other land in the Country area of Victoria). During the 

Prohibited Period no fires, other than campfires, may be lit on any land 

within the Fire Protected Area without a permit or authority from DSE. 768 

Farming properties in the interface 

Bushfire prevention, and prescribed burning in particular, was the primary 

issue of concern for stakeholders in relation to the management of the 

public/private land interface. A number of stakeholders argued that there is 

an insufficient level of prescribed burning and other hazard reduction 

measures on public land which adjoins, or is located in proximity to, private 

land. 769 A number of stakeholders were also critical of the existing 

compensation arrangements for boundary fences which are damaged or 

destroyed by bushfires which originate on public land or during fire 

management operations. 770 

A shared zone of management 

The Committee was presented with two suggestions for dealing more 

effectively with the public/private land interface which are of particular note. 

Dr Tolhurst suggested the establishment of a “marginal kilometre” of 500 

214 

767 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Legislation and Fire Restrictions', viewed 7 May 

2008, . 

768 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Legislation and Fire Restrictions', viewed 7 May 

2008, . 

769 C. Schroeder, Submission, no. 76, 23 May 2007, p. 1. 


2007; I. Prentice, Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007; K. Lamb, Transcript of evidence, 

Traralgon, 2 August 2007.

RSCH.016.001.0457 


metres on either side of the boundary between public and private land as a 

means of sharing the responsibility and workload for managing fire hazards 

in the public/private land interface. Dr Tolhurst suggested that this would be 

a zone of “shared responsibility and shared rights” in which private 

landholders would be able to influence fuel management on the public land 

side and land management agencies would influence fuel management on 

the private land side. 771 

The VFF recommended the establishment of “buffer zones” along the 

public/private land interface as a means of better protecting private assets. 

These would consist of a track inside public land which adjoins private 

property. The VFF stated that this would improve access for a range of fire 

management purposes and reduce the current risks of damage by fire to 

fences and pasture. The VFF stated that the size of the buffer zones would 

vary according to local conditions but suggested that in forested areas of 

north-east Victoria, the zone should generally extend for a minimum of 30 

metres and provide an area which would be largely free of vegetation. 772 

The Committee is particularly mindful of the risks to private property which 

adjoins, or is located in proximity to, native vegetation on public land. The 

Committee also notes that there is no specific onus on land management 

agencies to reduce the risks to private property from native vegetation under 

the current legislative arrangements (outlined above). For example, although 

section 65(1) of the Forests Act 1958 provides DSE officers with the power 

to direct that neighbours carry out prevention or control works within 50 

metres of the boundary between public and private land, there is no specific 

reciprocal obligation on DSE or its partner agencies to minimise fire hazards 

on the public land side of the boundary. 

In the Committee’s view, the concept of a shared zone of responsibility, 

similar to that suggested by Dr Tolhurst, does have merit. As Dr Tolhurst 

has also noted, the IFMP framework may be a suitable tool for the 

establishment and management of such a shared zone. 


That the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework establish zones in 

the interface between public and private land in which bushfire risk 

management is the shared responsibility of the Victorian Government and 

private landholders. 



2007. 

215

RSCH.016.001.0458 


Fencing compensation 

A number of stakeholders stated that private landholders had received an 

inadequate level of Government assistance for the repair and replacement 

of fences along the boundary between public and private land following the 

recent bushfires. 773 Concerns were also expressed that fencing 

compensation arrangements following the recent fires lacked certainty and 

consistency. The Committee is also mindful of the serious impact on stock, 

pastures, feed supplies and other farming assets caused by the recent 

bushfires. 

The impact of the recent bushfires on fencing along the boundary between 

public and private land has been especially severe. The 2002/03 bushfires 

destroyed approximately 1,500 kilometres of fencing in the north east and 

east Gippsland. 774 The 2005/06 bushfires in the Kinglake, Grampians, 

Anakie and Moondarra regions caused the destruction of more than 2,500 

kilometres of boundary and internal fencing. 775 The 2006/07 bushfires 

destroyed nearly 2,000 kilometres of fencing in Gippsland and the north 

east. 776 

The VFF referred the Committee to the fact that although the Fences Act 

1968 (Vic) requires adjacent private land-holders to share fencing costs, 

there is no requirement that the Government contribute to the cost of 

boundary fencing between public and private land. 777 This is because the 

Government enjoys a general immunity from liability for fencing costs under 

section 31 of the Fences Act 1968 (Vic). The VFF informed the Committee 

that the current situation effectively penalises private landholders when the 

management of public land in interface areas results in increased 

vulnerability of fences to fire and falling vegetation. The VFF also stated that 

the cost of purchasing insurance for fencing had increased dramatically as a 

result of Government taxes and charges on fire insurance. The VFF 

concluded that there was a need for the Government to adopt a “good 

216 

773 See for example: C. Holmes, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007; S. Ramsay, 

President, Victorian Farmers Federation, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 2007; I. Prentice, 

Transcript of evidence, Traralgon, 2 August 2007; F. Barry, Transcript of evidence, Omeo, 29 


774 Ministerial Taskforce on Bushfire Recovery, 2003 Final Report from the Ministerial Taskforce on 

Bushfire Recovery, Victorian Government, Melbourne, 2003, pp. viii, 12, 19; Minister for Local 

Government, 'Flood of Calls for East Gippsland Bushfire Support', viewed 15 April 2008, 

. 

775 Minister for State and Regional Development, '10.8 M Bushfire Recovery Package Announced 

Today', viewed 16 April 2008, 

. 


Bushfire Recovery, Victorian Government, Melbourne, 2007, pp. 9, 41. 


2007.

RSCH.016.001.0459 


neighbour” policy and to provide more equitable arrangements for boundary 

fencing. 778 

The issue of Government immunity from liability under the Fences Act 1968 

(Vic), and the reliance of the former Department of Natural Resources and 

Environment on the immunity, was considered in a 1998 report by the Law 

Reform Committee of the Victorian Parliament. The Law Reform Committee 

noted that the majority of Victorian Government departments and public 

authorities did not invoke the immunity under the Fences Act 1968 and 

generally contributed fifty per cent of the reasonable cost of replacement 

fencing. 779 However, the Law Reform Committee also found that it was 

understandable that the then Department of Natural Resources and 

Environment was one of the few Government departments to rely on the 

immunity, given the vast area of land under its administration and the 

potentially significant financial burden of sharing fencing costs. 780 The 

report noted that boundaries between public and private land in Victoria 

totalled approximately 60,000 kilometres and that the estimated replacement 

value of existing boundary fencing was around $420 million. 781 The Law 

Reform Committee ultimately recommended that the Government contribute 

half the cost of replacing or repairing a dividing fence between public and 

private property following destruction or damage by a natural disaster, but 

only where the cost of replacement or repair was not otherwise 

recoverable. 782 

Following the 2002/03 bushfires, the Esplin Report noted that there was a 

general lack of consistency in the financial assistance provided for disaster 

relief, including natural disasters such as bushfires. 783 The report concluded 

that the Government should review the financial assistance and relief 

measures, including fencing policy, to develop a policy framework that 

applies in all circumstances. The report suggested that the development of 

such a framework should incorporate the following two principles: 

• it should not replace prudent risk management (insurance) by private 

land holders; and 

• it should be predictable, equitable, and consistent when applied to 

different areas, different emergencies and over different years. 784 


2007. 

779 Victorian Law Reform Commitee, Review of the Fences Act 1968, Parliament of Victoria, 



Melbourne, 1998, pp. 86-87. 


Melbourne, 1998, pp. 95-96. 







217

RSCH.016.001.0460 


The report concluded that: 

The framework should include general policy guidelines that can be flexibly managed 

where appropriate by local managers, applied in accordance with the above 

principles and linked with local circumstances and needs. It should also provide an 

imperative for appropriate land management on public land at the public/private 

interface. 785 

Following the 2002/03 fires, the Government announced a $5.75 million 

fencing package, which included: 

• $1.2 million to clear areas around fence lines; 

• $200,000 to coordinate a volunteer / paid workforce for fencing work; 

• $600,000 for subsidies for temporary stock containment areas; and 

• up to $3.75 million towards dog fencing the boundary with public 

land. 786 

The Government also reimbursed the insurance excess paid by farmers for 

the replacement or repair of fencing on the boundary with public land, up to 

a maximum of $400. 787 

Following the 2006/07 fires, the Government allocated $100,000 for the 

rebuilding of fences by volunteer groups. 788 The Government also released 

Bushfire Fencing Policy for Landholders, though it is unclear wether its 

provisions apply solely to the 2006/07 fires or also to future fires. The policy 

announced that, as in 2003, the Government would reimburse insurance 

excess costs up to a maximum of $400 for crown land boundary fences 

destroyed or damaged by bushfires that start on public land. 789 

Supplementary elements of the package included that the Government: 

• pay the full cost of fences or other assets destroyed or damaged if 

prescribed burns on public land escape onto private land; 

• pay the full cost of rehabilitating fire control lines on private property 

established by the CFA or DSE during wildfire suppression activity for 

fire originating on public land; and 

218 



786 Ministerial Taskforce on Bushfire Recovery, 2003 Final Report from the Ministerial Taskforce on 

Bushfire Recovery, Victorian Government, Melbourne, 2003, pp. viii,12,19. 

787 Minister for Agriculture - Office of the Premier, 'Bushfire Fencing Policy Supports Landholders', 

viewed 9 May 2008, 

. 

788 Office of the Premier, '$138 Million Bushfire Package to Revitalise Communities', viewed 7 May 

2008, 

. 


Bushfire Recovery, Victorian Government, Melbourne, 2007, p. 17.

RSCH.016.001.0461 


• pay the full cost of repairing or replacing fences on private land that 

are damaged or destroyed by machinery used in controlling bushfires 

that originate on public land. 790 

While the Committee believes that the supplementary policy initiatives 

mentioned above represent a fair and suitable Government response, the 

Committee is concerned that the $400 contribution to landholder insurance 

excesses was insufficient in some cases, and may not have adequately 

reflected a commitment to shared responsibility for managing the bushfire 

risk in the interface between public and private land. 

The Committee is mindful of the need for greater certainty, consistency and 

clarity in the Government response to fencing and other assistance following 

damage from bushfires, bushfire suppression and prescribed burning. To 

this end, the Committee believes that an ongoing Bushfire Fencing Policy 

should be developed which provides that: 

• the Government contribute half the cost of replacing or repairing for 

fencing on the boundary between public and private land that is 

destroyed or damaged by a fire which has emerged from public land, 

but only where the cost of replacement or repair was not otherwise 

recoverable; and 

• the Government pay a contribution, of up to 100 per cent, of the cost 

of restoring fences or other assets destroyed or damaged by 

backburning conducted during fire suppression operations. 791 

The administrative arrangements necessary to support such a Government 

policy are beyond the scope of this report. However, the Committee notes 

that such a policy would presumably require the use of Government 

endorsed insurers and fencing contractors, and a process of independent 

assessment of repair or replacement costs. The Committee does not 

consider that such a measure would remove the incentive for private 

landholders to maintain adequate insurance. This principle is in accordance 

with the recommendation in the Esplin Report that any arrangements in 

relation to fencing and other recovery assistance “should not, replace 

prudent risk management (insurance) by private land holders”. 792 In this 

respect, the Committee notes that landholders who decided to rely 

exclusively on such a Government contribution would face the risk of 

790 Minister for Agriculture - Office of the Premier, 'Bushfire Management – Bushfire Fencing Policy for 

Landholders (2007)', 

. 

791 The Government committed to the first three items in this list for damage caused by the 2006/07 

fires, see: Minister for Agriculture - Office of the Premier, 'Bushfire Management – Bushfire Fencing 

Policy for Landholders (2007)', 

. 



219

RSCH.016.001.0462 


significantly greater out-of-pocket expenses than those who had maintained 

insurance. 


That the Victorian Government establish a clear and consistent Bushfire 

Fencing Policy for damage caused by all future bushfires and prescribed 

burns. The Bushfire Fencing Policy should include the following provisions: 

- the Government contribute half the cost of replacing or repairing for 

fencing on the boundary between public and private land that is 

destroyed or damaged by a fire which has emerged from public land, but 

only where the cost of replacement or repair was not otherwise 

recoverable; 

- the Government pay a contribution, of up to 100 per cent, of the cost of 

restoring fences or other assets destroyed or damaged by backburning 

conducted during fire suppression operations; 

- the Government will pay the full cost of fences or other assets destroyed 

or damaged if prescribed burns on public land escape onto private land; 

- the Government will pay the full cost of rehabilitation of fire control lines 

on private property established by the Country Fire Authority or the 

Department of Sustainability and Environment during wildfire 

suppression activity for fire originating on public land ; and 

- the Government will pay the full cost of repairing or replacing fences on 

private land that are damaged or destroyed by machinery used in 

controlling bushfires that originate on public land. 

Residential properties in the interface 

The problem of bushfire prevention and suppression in the interface 

between public and private land is further complicated by the fact that, 

native vegetation does not necessarily end at the border between public and 

private property. The extent to which this is the case obviously varies 

depending on the nature of a particular property. The Committee notes 

however, that the shift to rural and regional areas by particular 

demographics within Victoria, including “weekend”, non-resident and retired 

landowners, has been identified as a cause of increasing residential 

development within, or in close proximity, to native vegetation. This poses 

particular challenges for the management of the public/private land 

interface. 

This demographic shift, which is referred to popularly as the “tree-change” 

and “sea-change” movements, is particularly notable in areas such as the 

Dandenongs, Macedon Ranges, Surf Coast and Gippsland. Its implications 

for the management of the bushfire risk in public/private land interface areas 

220

RSCH.016.001.0463 


has been described by Mr Neil Bibby, Chief Executive Officer of the Country 

Fire Authority as follows: 

The sea change and the tree change in movement of the population to places like 

the Surf Coast, Macedon and the Dandenong Ranges really puts something in the 

middle of the fire line that we have not had to deal with before — a large number of 

people and houses. We have spoken about the two fires that have occurred — the 

02–03 fires and the 05–06 fires, even the Grampians fires. We may have been lulled 

into a false sense of security. None of those large fires had the intensity or the speed 

that the Canberra fires had or Ash Wednesday had. Now you add the demographic 

changes with tree change and sea change and you see that we have the potential to 

have a disaster which is significantly like Canberra….What happened in 2002–03 

and in 2005–06 in the middle of the Grampians were slow-moving fires — 

comparatively slow. The Dandenongs, Macedon Ranges, Surf Coast and other 

interface areas are very, very dangerous. 793 

Mr Voigt, DSE, has described the problem of native vegetation on private 

land in the interface areas of the Otways region as follows: 

… a lot of times the private land is heavy bush, just the same as the public land that 

we are protecting, and it makes no sense to stop at that line in a lot of cases. We 

have found that to be a big challenge. We were working in the Otways this year in 

our enhanced protection of coastal settlements. A lot of the interface there, despite 

popular belief, is not public land but is private land bush. So that is a challenge that 

we will be working on over coming months as we take that process to the next 

stage… 794 

Mr Kevin O’Loughlin, Chief Executive Officer, Bushfire Cooperative 

Research Centre, informed the Committee of current research to improve 

the safety of house design in or near areas of native vegetation: 

One of the things we are doing there is undertaking research on how to make houses 

safer. This relates to the building materials as well as the house design — what kinds 

of glass, what kinds of decking material and so on — but also to gardens. 

As we know from the Canberra fires it was the gardens that transported the fire into 

the suburbs. 795 

Mr O’Loughlin also referred to the increasing engagement of fire and land 

management agencies with state and local government in the planning of 

residential construction in or near areas of native vegetation. 796 

The Committee also notes that the CFA has produced a kit which is 

designed to deal with this issue. CFA’s Building in a Wildfire Management 

Overlay – Applicant’s Kit 2007 contains a set of guidelines for the 

appropriate siting and design of buildings and associated risk management 

strategies in areas vulnerable to bushfires. The kit was developed with the 

793 N. Bibby, Chief Executive Officer, Country Fire Authority, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 4 

June 2007. 



795 K. O'Loughlin, Chief Executive Officer, Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 2007. 

796 K. O'Loughlin, Chief Executive Officer, Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 16 July 2007. 

221

RSCH.016.001.0464 


assistance of councils, the Municipal Association of Victoria, Department of 

Infrastructure, DSE and the Building Commission. The kit notes that where a 

property has been adequately prepared, a house may provide a “safe haven 

to protect residents from the passage of a wildfire”. 797 The kit is therefore a 

significant contribution to public awareness of the importance of making an 

early decision to either stay and defend a property or to leave early, 

commonly referred to as the “stay or go” policy, promoted by fire and land 

management agencies. 


The Committee believes that the decision to build and live in or near areas 

of native vegetation should be made with an awareness of the associated 

risks from bushfires. It is unrealistic to expect that fire agencies will be able 

to successfully defend all properties from all bushfires, particularly those 

which are inappropriately sited and constructed. The Committee welcomes 

the signs of an increasing recognition within the community of the need for 

greater self-reliance, preparation and prevention in relation to the risk of 

bushfire on both public and private land. Finally, the Committee believes that 

the increase in community engagement under the IFMP framework and the 

reduction from five to four fire management zones recommended by the 

Esplin Report as a means of increasing prescribed burning in the asset 

protection zone (and ecological burning), are also likely to contribute to 

addressing the challenges of an increasing population in the public/private 

land interface. 

Integrated Fire Management Planning 

The Integrated Fire Management Planning (IFMP) framework has been 

approved by the Government and is now in its implementation stage. The 

framework is the result of a consultation process through the Integrated 

Municipal Fire Management Planning (IMFMP) project, which was 

established by the Government to implement recommendations for 

improvements to fire prevention, preparation, response, and recovery 

contained in the Esplin Report and the 2003 Auditor-General’s Performance 

Audit of Fire Prevention. 798 . The goal of the project was the development of 

a single planning framework for participation in fire management by all 

municipalities and agencies with a fire management role. 799 The framework 

aims to create “a shift in focus from separate fire prevention and response 

planing to a more strategic and integrated approach to fire management 

planning”, and to integrate planning across private and public land. 800 The 

222 

797 Country Fire Authority, 'Building in a Wildfire Management Overlay: Applicants Kit 2007', viewed 9 

May 2008, . 

798 Integrated Municipal Fire Management Planning, 'Integrated Municipal Fire Management Planning 

- Planning for a Safer Victoria', viewed 11 April 2008, . 


- Planning for a Safer Victoria', viewed 11 April 2008, . 


Draft Position Paper', viewed 16 April 2008, 

.; See also, Integrated Municipal Fire

RSCH.016.001.0465 


IFMP framework was recently approved by the Premier, following a process 

of statewide consultation. 801 The framework will involve the establishment of 

planning committees at the State, regional and municipal levels. The 

approved framework reflects the finding that while municipal fire 

management planning will remain the focus of the project, planning can only 

be effective at this level if it is integrated with regional and State level 

planning. 802 This finding is also reflected in the fact that the final planning 

structure has been named the IFMP framework rather than the IMFMP 

framework. A new website is also planned which will distinguish the IMFMP 

project from the IFMP framework. Implementation of the framework has 

commenced, with the establishment of the State Fire Management Planning 

Committee. However, regional and municipal committees are yet to be 

established. 803 

Some of the key principles of the IFMP project include: 

• recognition that municipal boundaries (which are land tenure ‘blind’) 

are the logical platform for integrated fire management planning in 

Victoria; 

• recognition that risk-based planning may cut across administrative 

boundaries and that there will be a need for this to be accommodated 

by municipal and regional leadership; 

• commitment to a process of community engagement, which 

incorporates recognition of local knowledge and experience, as the 

basis of effective planning; and 

• an approach to fire management which covers all types of fire risk 

and which recognises cultural and heritage values and the 

importance of fire as a tool for land management and cultural 

applications. 804 

Management Planning, 'Initial Discussion Paper: October 2005', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 

801 Integrated Municipal Fire Management Project, 'About the Framework', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 



. 

803 Integrated Municipal Fire Management Project, 'About the Framework', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 



. 

223

RSCH.016.001.0466 


The CFA, which has been established as the lead agency for the 

implementation of the IFMP framework, has described the new framework 

as ensuring community input into the fire management planning process as 

well as the establishment of a consistent state-wide approach to planning for 

fires. 805 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE stated that the IFMP framework will 

enable CFA, DSE and PV to achieve significantly greater levels of 

community engagement in the management of public land for the prevention 

and suppression of fire. 806 A number of stakeholders also expressed 

confidence in the potential of the IFMP project to increase the input of local 

knowledge in fire planning. 807 

As the Committee has noted in Chapter Two, the transition from Fire 

Protection Plans to Fire Management Plans under the Code is currently 

subject to the development of “linkage documents” between Fire 

Management Plans and Municipal Fire Prevention Plans. 808 (Each 

municipality is currently responsible for the preparation of a Municipal Fire 

Prevention Plan (MFPP) under the Country Fire Act 1958. The CFA has an 

auditing role in relation to MFPPs. 809 ) However, the development of the 

necessary “linkage documents” is subject to the full implementation of the 

IFMP framework 810 and, as noted above, regional and municipal committees 

have yet to be established. The Committee welcomes the recent 

establishment of the State Fire Management Planning Committee under the 

IFMP framework and considers that the framework has significant potential 

to improve the standard of community engagement in land and fire 

management in Victoria. However, the Committee also considers that there 

is a clear need to expedite the creation of the IFMP’s regional and municipal 

committees to reduce any further delay in the development of the “linkage 

documents” required for the transition to Fire Management Plans under the 

Code. The Committee is mindful that the capacity of the IFMP framework to 

enhance community engagement at the local level cannot be realised until 

the framework is fully implemented and the regional and municipal 

committees become operational. 

Finally, the Committee is not aware of any reason why the creation of 

linkage documents should be restricted to demonstrating the links and 

alignment between Municipal Fire Prevention Plans and Fire Management 

Plans, as is currently required under the Code. As the Committee has 

224 

805 Country Fire Authority, 'IMFMP - Better Planning for a Safer Victoria', viewed 22 June 2008, 

. 

806 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, p. 31.. 

807 See for example: S. Ramsay, President, Victorian Farmers Federation, Transcript of evidence, 

Melbourne, 16 July 2007; G. Jack, Municipal Emergency Research Officer, Shire of Yarra Ranges, 


808 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Submission, no. 168E, 4 April 2008, pp. 3-4.; 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Code of Practice for Fire Management on Public Land, 


809 Country Fire Authority, 'Municipal Fire Prevention Planning Guidelines', viewed 20 June 2008, 

. 


RSCH.016.001.0467 


outlined in this chapter, Fire Operations Plans offer a significantly greater 

potential for engagement by local communities in day to day fire 

management than Fire Management Plans, particularly in relation to 

prescribed burning. The Committee is therefore unaware of any reason why 

future linkage documents should not also demonstrate specific links and 

alignment between Municipal Fire Prevention Plans and Fire Operations 

Plans. 


That the Victorian Government, and responsible agencies, expedite the 

implementation of the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework. 

That the Integrated Fire Management Planning framework integrate, as far as 

possible, fire management planning at the municipal level with both Fire 

Protection Plans (or their future equivalents) and Fire Operations Plans. 

The media 

The media plays a significant role in maintaining community engagement 

and as a tool for community engagement in the management of fire. As 

noted in Chapter Two, the influence of the media on the public attitude to 

prescribed burning has been particularly strong. Some reporting has 

focused on the smoke produced by prescribed burning and has given an 

inaccurate impression of the damage caused by escaped burns. On the 

other hand, the media has also played an invaluable role in ensuring that 

people are informed both before and during prescribed burns and that they 

are provided with the information needed to properly prepare and respond to 

bushfires. The role of the ABC, particularly in country areas, is especially 

important in this regard. 

The Institute of Australian Foresters has described the potentially negative 

influence of the media on public support for prescribed burning, in contrast 

to bushfire suppression, as follows: 

The role of the Australian media is generally not helpful, in that it tends to dramatise 

and glamorise suppression, while ignoring or denigrating fire prevention. Over many 

years, the media has (rightly) raised the status of firefighters to the level of saints, 

while often attacking land management staff engaged in fuel management work. 811 

There were instances of this approach to reporting during the Wilsons 

Promontory burn escape, discussed in Chapter Two. Although the media 

played a significant role in ensuring the safety of the public at the time of the 

burn, the Committee was informed that a number of reports contained 

inaccuracies regarding the areas threatened by the burn and exaggerated 

the risks to tourists and campers. 812 A number of reports also inaccurately 

811 Institute of Foresters Australia, House Select Commmittee on the Recent Australian Bushfires - A 

submission of the Institute of Foresters of Australia, Institute of Foresters Australia, Canberra, 2003, p. 

21. 


225

RSCH.016.001.0468 


described the burn as having caused serious long-term damage to the 

ecology and amenity of a large area of Wilsons Promontory. However, 

during a site visit to the Promontory, the Committee observed areas of 

rapidly regenerating flora throughout the burn area. The Committee was 

also informed by one of a team of volunteer botanists engaged in post-fire 

monitoring for DSE and Parks Victoria at the Promontory that the burn had 

been overwhelmingly beneficial for the biodiversity of the area affected. 813 

Given the tendency of the media to focus on events that threaten human life 

and assets, it is understandable that preventative measures, such as the 

prescribed burning program, have not received the same level of positive 

media coverage as fire suppression efforts in the past. The Committee 

notes, however, that there is an increasing recognition by DSE and its 

partner agencies of the need to fully inform the media of the rationale for, 

and details of, its fire management activities throughout the year. The 

Committee believes that this approach is likely to significantly enhance the 

capacity of the media to inform and engage the community in all aspects of 

fire management. 


That the Department of Sustainability and Environment and its partner 

agencies continue to develop a proactive approach to engagement with the 

local and wider media to achieve continuous improvement in the standard of 

community information and education. 

226 

813 Department of Sustainability and Environment, personal communication, 5 May 2008.

RSCH.016.001.0469 

Chapter 7: Climate Change and Bushfire 

Chapter 

7 

Climate Change and Bushfire 

In terms of prevention and mitigation, the scale of the increasing fire management 

problem, compounded by the impact of climate change, means we must adjust our 

focus and invest more in mitigation and prevention, but it also has to accompany our 

recognition that some fires, simply put, will not be suppressed. Our only option is to 

do more in the way of prevention, mitigation and community engagement to get as 

much groundwork done before the fire season starts. 814 

Introduction 

Term of reference number ten requires the Committee to consider the 

impact of climate change on bushfires and public land management 

practices. 

Over recent years, Australia, particularly the south east, has experienced 

significant fire events. The 2002/03 and 2006/07 Victorian bushfires are 

prime examples. The evidence provided to this Inquiry and others, has 

highlighted that there is a growing awareness of bushfires in Australia. As 

Lucas (et al) notes, growing community awareness has been accompanied 

by a general perception that bushfire seasons are becoming more extreme, 

with an increase in the number of ‘very high’ and ‘extreme’ fire danger days, 

and therefore and increased risk of larger, more frequent and less 

controllable bushfires. 815 Some commentators also argue that climate 

change is one the principal drivers behind the “mega fire ◊ ” phenomenon that 

has reportedly been occurring around the world over recent years. 816 

While Australia is a relatively small greenhouse gas emitter by international 

standards, the impacts of climate change still pose a significant risk to 

Australians. For example, scientific evidence suggests that climate change 



815 C. Lucas, K. Hennessey, G. Mills and J. Bathols, Bushfire Weather in Southeast Australia: Recent 

Trends and Projected Climate Change Impacts, Bushfire CRC, Melbourne, 2007, p. 39. 

◊ The term mega-fire typically refers to fires of extraordinary size, complexity and resistance to control. 

Such fires are frequently long-lived and require a large sustained resource commitment. 

816 G. Lean, 'More 'megafires' to come, say scientists', viewed 12 May 2008, 

.; S. Pelley, 'Age of Megafires', viewed 12 May 2008, 

.; S. Pyne, 'Mulling Over Megafires: A 

statement by Stephen J. Pyne', viewed 12 May 2008, 

. 

227

RSCH.016.001.0470 


in Australia may lead to an increase in the frequency and intensity of fires. 817 

Similarly, Professor Andy Pitman notes that climate change will “increase 

the risk of forest and grassland fires, and that the higher emissions the 

higher the increase in the fire risk”. 818 

The CSIRO confirm the effect of climate change on fire risk, noting that as a 

result of climate change on the south east of Australia the region is likely to 

become hotter and drier in the future. 819 Studies also suggest that the 

window available for prescribed burning may shift and narrow, and that it is 

likely that higher fire-weather risk in spring, summer and autumn will 

increasingly shift periods suitable for prescribed burning toward winter. 820 

This chapter initially provides an overview of climate change, highlighting the 

observed and projected impacts of climate change at the international, 

national and state levels. An examination of the debate surrounding climate 

change, highlighting stakeholder views will also be illustrated. The chapter 

concludes by examining the adequacy of the Government’s response in 

relation to climate change and forwards recommendations aimed at 

improving the incorporation and consideration of climate change into fire 

management planning processes. 

What is Climate Change? 

The greenhouse effect refers to the naturally occurring process whereby the 

energy from the sun warms the surface of the planet. The land and water 

then re-radiates this heat, some of which is trapped by naturally occurring 

greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, resulting in a warming of the surface 

and the atmosphere. As such, the surface of the earth is warmer than it 

would be without greenhouse gases. 

However, a variety of human activities, or anthropogenic activities, 

particularly the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil or gas, result in an 

increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. It is argued that increasing 

concentrations of greenhouse gases result in a reduction in outgoing 

radiation thereby causing the surface temperature to rise. This is commonly 

referred to as the enhanced greenhouse effect and is believed to be 

responsible for global warming or climate change. 

228 

817 B. Pitcock, Climate Change: an Australian Guide to the Science and Potential Impacts, Australian 

Greenhouse Office, Canberra, 2003, pp. 4-6. 

818 A. J. Pitman, G. T. Narisma and J. McAneney, 'The Impact of Climate Change on the Risk of 

Forest and Grassland Fires in Australia', Climatic Change, vol. 84, 2007, p. 398. 

819 CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, Submission, no. 166, 31 May 2007.; K. Hennessey, C. Lucas, N. 

Nicholls, J. Bathols, R. Suppiah and J. Ricketts, Climate change impacts on fire-weather in south-east 

Australia, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, 2005, p. 11. 

820 K. Hennessey, C. Lucas, N. Nicholls, J. Bathols, R. Suppiah and J. Ricketts, Climate change 

impacts on fire-weather in south-east Australia, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research 

Organisation, Canberra, 2005, p. 5.

RSCH.016.001.0471 


Each greenhouse gas varies in its capacity to trap solar radiation. For 

example, nitrous oxide (N 2 O) has 310 times the global warming potential 

(GWP) of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). By using CO 2 equivalents (CO 2 -e), GWP 

provides a means by which the potential of different gases to contribute to 

climate change can be compared. 821 For example, if emissions of CO 2 were 

50 tonnes, and emissions of N 2 O were one tonne, total CO 2 -e emissions 

would be 360 tonnes – that is (50 x 1) + (1 x 310). 

Greenhouse gases covered by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 

include: carbon dioxide (CO 2 ); methane (CH 4 ); nitrous oxide (N 2 O); 

perfluorocarbons (PFC); hydrofluorocarbons (HFC); and sulphur 

hexafluoride (SF 6 ). 822 Figure 7.1 shows the contribution to Australia’s net 

CO 2 -e emissions by greenhouse gas. 

Figure 7.1: Contribution to total net CO 2 - e emissions by 

greenhouse gas, 2005. 823 

20% 

4% 

1% 

75% 

CO2 

CH4 

N2O 

HFCs & PFCs 

In 2005, Australia’s national greenhouse gas emissions were over 559 

million tonnes. 824 Twenty-eight percent of these gases were from New South 

Wales, 28% from Queensland, 22% from Victoria, 12% from Western 

Australia, five per cent from South Australia, two per cent from the Northern 

Territory, two per cent from Tasmania and less than one per cent from the 

Australian Capital Territory. 825 

821 Victorian Government, 'Information Sheet: Victorian Greenhouse Gas Inventory - 2004', viewed 15 

May 2008, 

. 

822 Australian Government, National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 2005, Australian Greenhouse Office, 

Canberra, 2007, p. 2. 



824 Australian Government, State and Territory Greenhouse Gas Invertories 2005, Australian 

Greenhouse Office, Canberra, 2007, p. 2. 

825 Australian Government, State and Territory Greenhouse Gas Invertories 2005, Australian 

Greenhouse Office, Canberra, 2007, p. 2. 

229

RSCH.016.001.0472 


Australia’s energy sector, comprising stationary energy, transport and 

fugitive emissions ◊ , contributes 69% of Australia’s greenhouse gas 

emissions. 826 Industrial processes, agriculture, land use change and 

forestry, and waste comprise the remainder. 

It is worth noting that Australia’s State of the Forests Report 2008 reported 

that in 2005, Australia’s CO 2 -e emissions from bushfire and prescribed 

burning totalled 1.3 million tonnes. 827 In comparison, the 2006/07 Victorian 

bushfires reportedly emitted 40 million tonnes of CO 2 -e. 828 While 2006/07 

greenhouse gas inventory figures are not available, based on the 2005 

emissions figure of 559 million tonnes CO 2 -e, the Victorian bushfires would 

have contributed approximately seven per cent to Australia’s greenhouse 

gas emissions for that year. 

Climate Change Trends and Predictions 

International 

While issues surrounding the debate and contentions regarding climate 

change will be addressed later in the chapter, it is worth highlighting some of 

the trends and projected impacts of climate change. 

The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is a scientific 

intergovernmental body established by the World Meteorological 

Organization to “assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and 

transparent basis the latest scientific, technical and socio-economic 

literature produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of the risk of 

human-induced climate change, its observed and projected impacts and 

options for adaptation and mitigation”. 829 A 2007 report prepared by one of 

the IPCCs working groups noted that: 

• the average temperature on the Earth’s surface has risen by about 

0.7ºC since 1900; 

• the 11 warmest years on records since 1850 have occurred in the 

past 12 years; 

230 

◊ Fugitive emissions are greenhouse gas emissions other than those attributable to energy use from 

coal mining and handling, and oil and natural gas production, processing and transportation. Fugitive 

emissions typically include emissions from combustion where it does not support a productive activity. 

For example, flaring of natural gases at oil and gas production facilities. 



827 Montreal Process Implementation Group for Australia, 'Criterion Five: Maintenance of Forest 

Contribution to Global Carbon Cycles', in Australia's State of the Forests Report, Bureau of Rural 

Sciences, Canberra, 2008, p. 121. 

828 R. Underwood, D. Packham and P. Cheney, Bushfires, Prescribed Burning and Global Warming: 

Bushfire Front Inc Occasional Paper No 1, Bushfire Front Inc, 2008, p. 5.; National Association of 

Forest Industries, Submission, no. 245, 17 September 2007, p. 4. 

829 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 'About IPCC', viewed 16 May 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0473 


Australia 

• global sea level has risen 170mm since 1900; and 

• the incidence of extremely high temperatures has increased while 

incidences of low temperature have decreased. 830 

The IPCC concluded that: 

Most of the observed increase in global average temperature since the mid-20th 

century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas 

concentrations. 831 

Based on the work reported by the IPCC, Table 7.1 illustrates a range of 

projected impacts of climate change. 

Australian temperatures have increased by an average 0.9°C since the 

1950s with significant regional variations. 832 Rainfall patterns during this time 

period have also changed with rainfall in north west Australia increasing by 

more than 50mm per decade since the 1950s. 833 Conversely eastern and 

south western Australia have seen decreases in rainfall with decreases in 

rainfall along parts of the east coast exceeding 50mm since the 1950s. 834 

Between 1920 to 2000, estimated average relative sea level rise was 

1.2mm/year. 835 

CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology models predict that Australia will 

experience a one degree warming by 2030 (relative to 1990), with warmings 

of around 0.7-0.9ºC in coastal areas and 1-1.2ºC in inland areas. 836 By 2050 

annual warming projections range from 0.8-2.8ºC, and by 2070 ranges of 

1.0-5.0ºC degrees are predicted. 837 

830 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 'Summary for Policymakers', in Climate Change 

2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Fourth Assessment Report 

of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, S Solomon, et al. (eds), Cambridge University 

Press, Cambridge, 2007, pp. 1-18; CSIRO, Climate Change in Australia: Technical Report 2007, 

CSIRO Publishing, Canberra, 2007, p. 7. 

831 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 'Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Summary 

for Policymakers', viewed 16 May 2008, . 

832 

CSIRO, Climate Change in Australia: Technical Report 2007, CSIRO Publishing, Canberra, 2007, 

p. 6; R. Suppiah and P. H. Whetton, Projected Changes in Temperature and Heating Degree-Days for 

Melbourne and Victoria, 2008-2012, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 2007, p. vii. 

833 

CSIRO, Climate Change in Australia: Technical Report 2007, CSIRO Publishing, Canberra, 2007, 

p. 18. 

834 

Garnaut Climate Change Review, Garnaut Climate Change Review Interim Report to the 

Commonwealth, State and Territory Government of Australia, Commonwealth, State and Territory 

Governments of Australia, Canberra, 2008, p. 22; CSIRO, Climate Change in Australia: Technical 

Report 2007, CSIRO Publishing, Canberra, 2007, p. 18. 

835 CSIRO, Climate Change in Australia: Technical Report 2007, CSIRO Publishing, Canberra, 2007, 

p. 7. 


pp. 9-10. 


pp. 9-10. 

231

RSCH.016.001.0474 


Table 7.1: IPCC key findings regarding projected impacts of 

climate change. 838 

Freshwater resources and 

their management 

Ecosystems 

Food, Fibre and Forest 

Products 

Coasts 

Industry, settlement and 

society 

Health 

Projected increased water availability in moist tropics and high latitudes. 

Projected decreased water availability and increasing drought in mid-latitudes 

and semi-arid low latitudes. 

Water supplies stored in glaciers and snow projected to decline. 

Drought-affected areas likely to increase in extent. 

Resilience of many ecosystems likely to be exceeded this century by an 

unprecedented combination of climate change, and associated disturbances (eg. 

fire, flood, drought) and other global change drivers (eg pollution). 

20-30% of plant and animal species assessed are likely to be at increased risk of 

extinction if temperatures exceed 1.5-2.5°C. 

Possible changes to ecosystem structure and function, species’ ecological 

interactions, and species geographical ranges, with predominantly negative 

consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem goods and services. 

The progressive acidification of oceans due to increasing carbon dioxide is 

expected to negatively impact marine-shell forming organisms and their 

dependent species. 

Crop productivity at mid to high latitudes is projected to increase slightly for 

mean temperature increase of up to 1-3°C. 

Crop productivity at lower latitudes is projected to decrease for even small local 

temperature increases. 

Globally, the potential for food production is projected to increase with 

increases in local average temperature over a range of 1-3°C, but decrease 

above this temperature. 

Coasts are projected to be exposed to increasing risks, including coastal erosion 

and sea-level rise. 

Increases in sea surface temperatures are of about 1-3°C are projected to result 

in more frequent coral bleaching events. 

Coastal wetlands are projected to be negatively affected by sea-level rise 

Communities are expected to be flooded every year due to sea-level rise by the 

2080s. 

Costs and benefits of climate change for industry, settlements and society will 

vary widely by locations and scale, with the net effects will tend to be more 

negative the larger the change in climate. 

Industries, settlements and societies with close links to climate-sensitive 

resources will be the most vulnerable. Poor communities may be especially 

vulnerable due to limited adaptive capacities. 

Where extreme weather events become more intense and/or frequent, the 

economic and social costs of those events will increase. 

Projected climate change-related exposures are likely to affect the health status 

of millions, particularly those with low adaptive capacity through: 

• increase in malnutrition and consequent disorders; 

• increased deaths, disease and injury due to heatwaves, floods, storms, fires 

and droughts; 

• the increased burden of diarrhoeal disease; 

• the increased frequency of cardio-respiratory disease due to higher 

concentrations of ground level ozone; and 

• the altered spatial distribution of some infectious diseases. 

838 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 'Summary for Policymakers ', in Climate Change 

2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L Parry, et al. (eds), Cambridge University Press, 

Cambridge, 2007, pp. 11-13. 

232

RSCH.016.001.0475 


Victoria 

Estimates for 2030 of annual precipitation indicate little change in the far 

north and decreases of two per cent to five per cent elsewhere. 839 The 

changes leading into 2050 are more pronounced with models providing 

figures between -15% to +7.5% in central, eastern and northern areas, with 

a best estimate of little change in the far north grading southwards to a 

decrease of five per cent for 2050. 840 In 2070, the range of annual 

precipitation change is -30% to +20% in central, eastern and northern areas, 

with a best estimate of little change in the far north grading to around -10% 

in the south. 841 Other impacts reported in the CSIRO report include a 

substantial increase in fire weather, increased wind in most coastal areas 

and an increase in the occurrence of drought. 842 

Similar to the impacts reported in the IPCC report, the Garnaut Climate 

Change Review Interim Report highlights a range of possible climate 

change impacts for Australia based on a range of temperature increases. 

For example, as illustrated in Table 7.2, a less than one degree celsius 

temperature increase may result in the shrinkage of snow covered areas in 

the Australian Alps by 10-40%, while a two to three degrees celsius 

temperature increase could result in a 40% reduction in livestock carrying 

capacity for native pasture systems. 843 Of particular interest to this Inquiry is 

the increased risk of bushfire damage as a result of a one to two degree 

celsius temperature increase. 844 The impact of climate change on bushfires 

is discussed later in this chapter. 

The Victorian maximum temperature between 1950 and 2005 increased by 

0.71ºC while the minimum temperature increased by 0.44ºC, and the 

average temperature rose by 0.58ºC. 845 Greater warming was observed 

from 1950 to 2005, compared with 1910 to 1950. 846 


pp. 9-10. 


pp. 9-10. 


pp. 9-10. 


pp. 9,11-12. 

843 Garnaut Climate Change Review, Garnaut Climate Change Review Interim Report to the 


Governments of Australia, Canberra, 2008, p. 23. 

844 Garnaut Climate Change Review, Garnaut Climate Change Review Interim Report to the 


Governments of Australia, Canberra, 2008, p. 23. 

845 R. Suppiah and P. H. Whetton, Projected Changes in Temperature and Heating Degree-Days for 

Melbourne and Victoria, 2008-2012, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 2007, pp. 4-5. 

846 R. Suppiah and P. H. Whetton, Projected Changes in Temperature and Heating Degree-Days for 

Melbourne and Victoria, 2008-2012, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 2007, p. 4. 

233

RSCH.016.001.0476 


Table 7.2: Possible climate impacts in Australia for a range 

of temperatures. 847 

Temp Rise 

above 

1990-2000 

levels 

RSCH.016.001.0477 


relative warming is projected to be greatest in summer and least in winter. 

The report also projected that annual average rainfalls tend to decrease 

over most of the state (–15% to +3% in 2030 and –40% to +10% in 2070 in 

northern Victoria, and –9% to +3% in 2030 and–25% to +9% in 2070 in 

southern Victoria). 850 The predicted decreases in rainfall are strongest in 

spring through most of the State. 851 Similar projections are also forwarded in 

Suppiah (et al). 852 

Based on climate change models by CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology, 

Figures 7.2 and 7.3 illustrate projected Victorian temperature and rainfall in 

2030 based on a variety of emission scenarios. 853 Of particular interest to 

the Committee is the prediction of decreased rain in winter and spring which 

may contribute to a “drying out” of fuel prior to the summer bushfire season. 

850 R. Suppiah, P. H. Whetton and I. G. Watterson, Climate Change in Victoria. Assessment of 

Climate Change for Victoria: 2001-2002, Department of Sustainability and Environment; CSIRO, 

Melbourne, 2004, p. 32 

851 

R. Suppiah, P. H. Whetton and I. G. Watterson, Climate Change in Victoria. Assessment of 

Climate Change for Victoria: 2001-2002, Department of Sustainability and Environment; CSIRO, 


852 

R. Suppiah, K. J. Hennessey, P. H. Whetton, K. McInnes, I. Macadam, J. Bathols, J. Ricketts and 

C. M. Page, 'Australian Climate Change Projections Derived from Simulations Performed for the IPCC 

4th Assessment Report', Aust. Met. Mag., no. 56, 2007, pp. 138-139. 

853 

Australian Government, 'Victoria Temperature Change', viewed 16 May 2008, 

.;Australian Government, 'Victoria 

Rainfall Change', viewed 16 May 2008, . 

235

RSCH.016.001.0478 


Figure 7.2: Victorian temperature change in 2030 based on 

low, medium and high emissions scenarios. 854 

236 

854 

Australian Government, 'Victoria Temperature Change', viewed 16 May 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0479 


Figure 7.3: Victorian rainfall change in 2030 based on low, 

medium and high emissions scenarios. 855 

While the exact impacts of changes in the Victorian climate are difficult to 

determine, the range of possible impacts are likely to include: 

• increased likelihood of invasion by exotic plant and animal species; 

• increased demand on water resources for irrigation purposes; 

• changes to soil characteristics, water and nutrient cycling, plant 

productivity, species interaction, ecosystem function and composition; 

855 Australian Government, 'Victoria Rainfall Change', viewed 16 May 2008, 

. 

237

RSCH.016.001.0480 


• increased risk of damage to electricity infrastructure as a result of 

increased frequency and intensity of rainfall and wind events; 

• an increased risk of heat stress to the elderly and vulnerable 

communities; 

• growth in peak summer energy demand, due to air-conditioning use, 

which may increase the risk of blackouts; 

• declines in annual rainfall combined with higher evaporation are likely 

to reduce run-off into rivers by up to 45 percent in 29 Victorian 

catchments by 2030; 

• more frequent and severe droughts, with a greater fire risk; 

• increases in extreme storm events which are expected to cause more 

flash flooding affecting industry and infrastructure, including water, 

sewerage and stormwater, transport and communications, and may 

challenge emergency services; 

• frost-sensitive crops, such as wheat, may respond well to some 

warming however more hot days and less rainfall may reduce yields; 

• adverse effects for agriculture include reduced stone fruit yields in 

warmer winters, livestock stress and an increased prevalence of plant 

diseases, weeds and pests; and 

• CO 2 benefits experienced by forestry may be offset by a decline in 

rainfall, more bushfires and changes in pests. 856 

Response 

There are two broad approaches to responding to the potential impacts of 

climate change: 

• moderating the rate at which climate change is occurring by reducing 

greenhouse gas emissions. Such measures are commonly referred to 

as mitigation measures; and 

• adopting measures to “reduce the risks and capitalise on any 

benefits” of climate change. Such measures are commonly referred 

to as adaptation measures. 857 

238 

856 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Adapting to Climate Change - Enhancing Victoria's 

Capacity: Consultation Paper, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2004, pp. 

16-25. 

857 K. Hennessey, C. Page, K. McInnes, R. Jones, J. Bathols, D. Collins and D. Jones, Climate 

Change in New South Wales. Part 1: Past Climate Variability and Projected Changes in Average 

Climate, Climate Impact Group, CSIRO Atmostpheric Research, 2004, p. 40.

RSCH.016.001.0481 


In response to the threat of climate change, a range of public and private 

organisations have adopted a suite of measures to: reduce the net level of 

greenhouse gases in the atmosphere; and adapt to the potential impacts of 

climate change (both positive and negative). These measures include: fiscal 

measures such as taxation and financial incentives/subsidies; trading 

systems such as the Kyoto protocol; regulatory instruments such as housing 

standards and appliance labelling; Government leadership such as green 

procurement; partnerships; voluntary agreements; and information 

dissemination. 858 

Like many other jurisdictions, Victoria has adopted a range of measures to 

aid in the climate change transition. For example: mandatory five star 

requirements for new housing; funding for clean coal research; the Victorian 

Renewable Energy Target; the EPA Greenhouse Program, and the 

Electricity Wind Energy Development Act all provide direct and/or indirect 

greenhouse benefits. 859 

The Climate Change Debate 

As evidenced by the work undertaken by the IPCC, CSIRO and others, a 

significant amount of scientific research has been undertaken in examining 

climate change. However, it is important to recognise that climate change 

still remains a contentious issue, particularly the role of humans in climate 

change. 

As noted above, the majority of academics and institutions across the world 

now refer to the scientific evidence regarding climate change as “irrefutable” 

and “overwhelming”. However, as noted by Professor Don Aitkin, former 

Vice Chancellor University of Canberra “the notion that the science is settled 

is fatuous”. 860 Expressing a similar sentiment, the Heartland Institute, argues 

that the IPCC reports are far from reliable and ignore, or address 

imperfectly, other science issues that call for discussion and explanation. 861 

The Committee is cognisant that though apparently diminishing, there 

remains a level of scientific debate regarding the extent and causes, 

anthropogenic or otherwise, of climate change. 

858 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Climate Change Policies and Measures Adopted 

by Selected Countries', viewed 13 May 2008, 

. 

859 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Our Environment Our Future: Sustainability Action 

Statement, 2006, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2006, p. 15. ; 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Victorian Greenhouse Strategy Action Plan Update, 


860 D. Aitken, 'A Cool Look at Global Warming', viewed 21 May 2008, 

. 

861 S. Fred Singer, Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate: Summary for Policymakers of the 

Report of the Nongovernmental Panel on Climate Change, The Heartland Institute, Chicago IL, 2008, 

pp. 1-17. 

239

RSCH.016.001.0482 


However, based on the overwhelming majority of scientific evidence, the 

Committee supports the notion that the climate is changing. As such, and 

particularly as fire management necessitates a risk management approach, 

the Committee feels that it is prudent that the proceeding analysis, findings 

and recommendations, are developed under the assumption that climate 

change is occurring, and is predicted to worsen in the future. 

Predicted Climate Change Impact on Bushfire Prevention and 

Suppression 

Taking some Bureau of Meteorology data from the last fire season — 2006–07 — 

there were 44 fire weather warnings. The previous highest, no surprise, was in 2002– 

03 when there were 35. Looking back to 1984, the 22-year average for fire weather 

warnings was 16 fire weather warning days. In the past seven years that average 

has increased to 26 fire weather warning days — a 62 per cent increase. Last week 

the lead author of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Professor Andy 

Pitman, told a conference in Sydney that days of extreme fire risk will increase 

between 25 per cent and 50 per cent by the year 2050 …regardless of any cuts that 

may be able to be made to carbon emissions in the future. 862 

The bulk of the scientific evidence received and reviewed by the Committee 

argues that the magnitude and intensity of bushfires is expected to rise as a 

result of climate change. For example, Beer and Hennessey note 

respectively that: 

and 

…{there is} a widespread increase in the forest fire danger index as a result of 

enhanced greenhouse warming. 863 

There is also evidence for anthropogenic climate change being a driver of this 

upswing {in fire weather danger}. 864 

Scientific projections indicate that south east Australia is likely to experience 

warmer, drier and longer summers in the future and that this is likely to 

increase the frequency and intensity of fire weather and bushfires. 865 For 

example, a 2006 study exploring the impact of climate change on forest and 

grassland fire risk by Professor Pitman (et al) concluded that there is a 

“general increase in fire risk over Australia as the climate warms” for both 

high and low emissions scenarios between the years 2050 and 2100. 866 



863 

T. Beer and A. Williams, 'Estimating Australian Forest Fire Danger Under Conditions of Doubled 

Carbon Dioxide Concentrations', Climatic Change, vol. 29, no. 2, 1995, p. 186. 


Trends and Projected Climate Change Impacts, Bushfire CRC, Melbourne, 2007, p. 49. 



866 A. J. Pitman, G. T. Narisma and J. McAneney, 'The Impact of Climate Change on the Risk of 

Forest and Grassland Fires in Australia', Climatic Change, vol. 84, 2007, p. 399. 

240

RSCH.016.001.0483 


As noted by Hennessey, an increase in the intensity and frequency of fire 

weather would: 

• alter the distribution and composition of ecosystems; 

• lower the yield and quality of water from fire-affected catchments; 

• threaten the security of plantation forests; 

• increase smoke-related respiratory illness; 

• increase greenhouse gases to the atmosphere; 

• increase damage to property, livestock and crops; 

• increase the exposure of insurance companies to loss; and 

• increase the risk of injury, trauma and death to humans. 867 

CSIRO have undertaken modelling to provide an indication of fire risk based 

on temperature, precipitation, humidity and wind speed. 868 Using two 

different models both with a low and high rate scenario for climate change, 

Table 7.4 illustrates the average number of days when the Forest Fire 

Danger Index ◊ (FFDI) rating is “very high” or “extreme” under present 

conditions (1974-2003) for the years 2020 and 2050 for five Victorian 

locations. The table clearly illustrates that fire risk in all the Victorian towns 

modelled is likely to increase in the future. 

867 

K. Hennessey, C. Lucas, N. Nicholls, J. Bathols, R. Suppiah and J. Ricketts, Climate change 


Organisation, Canberra, 2005, p. 5. 




◊ Forest Fire Danger Index relates to the chances of a fire starting, its rate of spread, intensity and 

difficulty of suppression according to various combinations of temperature, relative humidity, wind 

speed and both long and short term drought effects in a forest. The FFDI has five intensity categories: 

low (less than 5); moderate (5-12); high (13-25); very high (25-49) and extreme (at least 50). 

241

RSCH.016.001.0484 


Table 7.4: Average number of days when the FFDI rating is 

“very high” or “extreme” under present conditions (1974- 

2003) for the years 2020 and 2050 under two differing climate 

change models for five Victorian locations. 869 

Site Present Model 1 Model 2 

2020 

(low) 

2020 

(high) 

2050 

(low) 

2050 

(high) 

2020 

(low) 

2020 

(high) 

2050 

(low) 

2050 

(high) 

Bendigo 17.8 19.5 21.3 21.4 27.3 19.7 21.9 22.0 29.8 

Laverton 15.5 16.4 17.3 17.3 21.2 16.6 17.8 17.8 22.3 

Melbourne 9.0 9.8 10.7 10.8 13.9 9.8 11.1 11.2 14.7 

Mildura 79.5 83.9 89.5 89.9 104.8 84.6 90.7 90.9 107.3 

Sale 8.7 9.3 10.0 10.1 12.1 9.6 10.7 10.8 14.0 

Similarly, a 2007 study conducted by the CSIRO investigating bushfire 

weather in south east Australia predicted that: 

By 2020 the increase in ∑FFDI is generally 0-4% in the low scenarios and 0-10% in 

the high scenarios. By 2050 the increase is generally 0-8% in the low scenario and 

10-30% in the high scenario. The number of extreme fire days generally increases 5- 

25% for the low scenarios and 15-65% for the high scenarios for 2020 and by 2050 

increase in the low scenario 10-50% and 100-300% for the high. 870 

The predicted changes in the FFDI suggest that the fire seasons are likely to 

become longer and start earlier in the year. 871 Coupled with increased 

dryness and the effects of drought it is likely that this will culminate in an 

overall increase in fire frequency. 

It is important to note that while the weather conditions preceding a fire are 

vitally important, the weather conditions during a fire also play a major role 

in the ability of agencies to effectively suppress the fire. For example, a 

significant contributor to the long period for which the 2002/03 bushfires 

remained active was the absence of any significant rain for several weeks 

after the ignition of the fire. 872 

In addition, as FFDI are used to not only monitor fire risk, but also to assist 

in the scheduling of prescribed burns, any changes in FFDI levels may 

impact upon DSE’s ability to conduct prescribed burns. As noted in 

Hennessey (et al): 

242 





Trends and Projected Climate Change Impacts, Bushfire CRC, Melbourne, 2007, pp. 48-49. 


Trends and Projected Climate Change Impacts, Bushfire CRC, Melbourne, 2007, pp. 48-49. 

872 Bureau of Meteorology, 'Meteorological Aspects of the Eastern Victorian Fires January - March 

2003', viewed 20 June 2008, 

.

RSCH.016.001.0485 


… the window available for prescribed burning may shift and narrow. It is likely that 

higher fire-weather risk in spring, summer and autumn will increasingly shift periods 

suitable for prescribed burning toward winter. 873 

Furthermore, in addition to the impacts previously described, a report 

modelling lightning occurrence prepared for the Godard Institute for Space 

Studies reported that the modelled frequency of lightning double over most 

of Australia under a doubling of CO 2 concentration scenario. 874 

The potential impacts of climate change on fire management processes, 

such as more frequent and more intense fire, clearly pose a significant 

challenge for land managers. In addressing this challenge, the Committee 

believes that land managers will need to focus their efforts on developing 

landscape scale fire prevention strategies to lessen the impact of large 

conflagrations. In this regard, the Committee finds that a substantial and 

sustained increased in resources to conduct preventative activities will be 

needed to mitigate the impacts of future bushfires. 

Finding 7.1: 

That to lessen the impact of more frequent and intense fires, as predicted by 

climate change projections, a substantial and sustained increase in 

resources to conduct preventive activities will be needed. 

While as previously noted, stakeholders expressed mixed views on the 

subject of climate change, stakeholder evidence was overwhelmingly in 

support of improved land management, particularly the need for an increase 

in the level of prescribed burning. In this regard, the Committee concurs with 

those stakeholders who described prescribed burning as a key measure by 

which to mitigate the risks posed by climate change associated wildfire. The 

Committee supports this notion and has recommended accordingly in 

Chapter Two. 

Underwood (et al) provide further support for an increase in prescribed 

burning arguing that as low intensity fires typically only burn fine fuels, the 

amount of CO 2 released by prescribed burning is smaller than that released 

by large bushfires. 875 Therefore, in order to prevent large fires and 

subsequent large emissions, prescribed burning should be viewed as key 

component in carbon management policy. 876 




874 G. Cary, 'Importance of a Changing Climate for Fire Regimes in Australia', in Flammable Australia, 

R Bradstock, et al. (eds), Cambridge University Press, 2001, p. 41. 


Bushfire Front Inc Occasional Paper No 1, Bushfire Front Inc, 2008, pp. 1-5. 


Bushfire Front Inc Occasional Paper No 1, Bushfire Front Inc, 2008, p. 4. 

243

RSCH.016.001.0486 


The Committee is aware that prescribed burning should not be viewed as a 

panacea and agrees with DSE’s submission that in certain circumstances 

inappropriate prescribed burning may threaten ecosystems already 

struggling with climate change, alpine, wet forest and riparian ecosystems 

for example. 877 However, as noted by Mr Roger Hallam, with similar 

sentiments expressed by Mr Richard Weatherly, land managers should not 

be “making allowances because there is climate change”. 878 The Committee 

agrees with this sentiment and notes that climate change should not be 

used as a reason for a lack of active land management, in particular, a lack 

of prescribed burning. As such, the Committee finds that, in most situations, 

prescribed burning remains the most effective method by which the impacts 

of climate change associated bushfire can be minimised. 

Finding 7.2: 

An increase in landscape scale prescribed burning, as recommended in 

Chapter Two, represents the key strategy for minimising the fire risks 

associated with climate change. 

Stakeholder Views 

While not the dominant theme emerging from the evidence provided to the 

Inquiry, climate change did emerge as a concern for a range of 

stakeholders. While a large number of stakeholders argued that climate 

change posed a threat to the management of public land, a small number of 

stakeholders strongly disagreed with the notion of climate change, 

particularly anthropogenic climate change, arguing that the perceived effects 

associated with climate change are in fact cyclical weather patterns. 

Despite this divergence of views on the extent and causes of climate 

change, a theme which was common to both stakeholder groups was that 

public land management needed to be improved to mitigate the future 

impacts of bushfire. The following section highlights some of the concerns 

raised by stakeholders: 

• Mr Athol Hodgson, Forest Fire Victoria, noted that that the warm 

weather and decreased rainfall predicted under climate change 

scenarios will enable more prescribed burning. 879 

• Mr Neil Barraclough and Mr David Evans both questioned the 

science behind climate change with Mr Barraclough labelling climate 


878 R. Hallam, Transcript of evidence, Dunkeld, 4 July 2007.; R. Weatherly, Submission, no. 118, 25 

May 2007, p. 7. 

879 A. Hodgson, Forest Fire Victoria, Transcript of evidence, Melbourne, 27 August 2007. 

244

RSCH.016.001.0487 


change science as a “pathetic corruption of statistics” while Mr Evans 

argued that some elements of climate change “don’t stack up”. 880 

• In a similar vein to Mr Barraclough and Mr Evans, Mr Holmes stated: 

On climate change, people talk about climate change; I think it is just a government 

fallacy. There is no such thing as a climate change. We are in a dry cycle. If you 

come to our area you will find that there are many salt lakes down there, fenced. 

These were fenced at the turn of the [previous] century. We have never seen the 

fences until [they emerged from the receding waters] the last probably five or six 

years. These fences appeared in these particular lakes. So all we are doing is going 

right back into a bit of a dry cycle. It will come again. So it is called climate change. I 

do not believe that is the case. 881 

• Mr Kevin Higgins expressed concern regarding climate change, 

arguing that climate change is a “load of rubbish” and that the 

problem lay with the build up of fuel. 882 

• Ms Joanne Butterworth-Gray, Chief Executive, Victorian Wine 

Industry Association, stated that winters in Gippsland had tended to 

be dryer over the last 10 years and challenged claims of a narrow 

window of opportunity to conduct prescribed burning. 883 

• Mr Fraser Barry highlighted the need for land mangers to be 

prepared, regardless of their views on climate change: 

Living where we live, we are surrounded by the bush. You can see the change in the 

bush; it has gone. It is that wooding up all the time. The water flows are changing 

and the riverbeds are changing — everything is changing. We are changing the 

environment, and I think it is making it harsher. As the place woods up, the fires are 

going to get more intense. I think we are getting into climate change, but we have 

also faced a lot of droughts and dry times over the years, and we are going to face 

them again whether climate change comes or goes, so we need to be prepared. 884 

• Mr Martyn Paterson expressed similar views to Mr Barry, informing 

the Committee that: 

But if we are to accept that drought is a symptom of climate change and that fires 

are a result of drought — certainly the frequency of fires in our region seems to 

mirror the predictions about climate change — then we must look to the future, I 

believe, on the consequences to our region, not only of more drought but of more 

fires, and we must work towards a plan. This inquiry is timely as temperatures are 

again heating up. The United Nations experts on climate change are predicting 

increased dangers as a result of climate change. 885 

880 N. Barraclough, Gippsland Apiarists Association, Transcript of evidence, Bairnsdale, 31 July 

2007.; D. Evans, Transcript of evidence, Mansfield, 26 November 2007. 

881 C. Holmes, Transcript of evidence, Halls Gap, 3 July 2007. 


883 J. Butterworth-Gray, Chief Executive, Victorian Wine Industry Association, Transcript of evidence, 


884 F. Barry, Submission, no. 162, 30 May 2007. 

885 M. Paterson, Submission, no. 228, 25 July 2007. 

245

RSCH.016.001.0488 


• Ms Catherine Murphy, Chief Executive Officer, National Association 

of Forest Industries, noted a similar concern arguing: 

…that climate change is going to be become more of an issue — that we are going 

to have longer droughts and that we are going to have more lightning strikes, which 

are the real concern here because, leaving arson aside, most of the fires have been 

originating through these lightning strikes — governments need to relook at the way 

our national parks are both created and managed. 886 

• Mr Bob Adams, Media Officer, Alpine Conservation and Access 

Group, argued that the impact of climate change on bushfires is 

minimal intimating that the climate impacts are cyclical. Mr Adams 

argued that more fuel reduction is needed including grazing, 

selective logging, autumn, and sometimes winter, fuel reduction 

burning. 887 

• Mr Bruce Esplin informed the Committee that the current approach to 

fire prevention is no longer viable under the influence of climate 

change and that planning for climate change is a major challenge. Mr 

Esplin stated: 

In terms of prevention and mitigation, the scale of the increasing fire management 

problem, compounded by the impact of climate change, means we must adjust our 

focus and invest more in mitigation and prevention, but it also has to accompany our 

recognition that some fires, simply put, will not be suppressed. Our only option is to 

do more in the way of prevention, mitigation and community engagement to get as 

much groundwork done before the fire season starts. 888 

Government Response 

In its submission to the Inquiry, DSE acknowledged that Victoria’s drought 

has been “more intense and temperatures hotter from climate change” and 

that the occurrence of fire is: 

… likely to be strongly influenced by climate as drought reduces the presence of 

usually moist gullies, moisture and water availability, and high temperatures allow fire 

to ignite more easily and spread. 889 

886 C. Murphy, Chief Executive Officer, National Association of Forest Industries, Transcript of 

evidence, Melbourne, 19 November 2007. 






246

RSCH.016.001.0489 


DSE have also acknowledged that they are aware that a significant change 

to the way in which fire is managed in Victoria is necessary. 890 From the 

evidence provided by DSE to the Committee it is clear that DSE are 

beginning to factor climate change into fire prevention and suppression 

management, though to what extent and rate remains unclear. As stated by 

Mr King, former Executive Director, Land and Fire Management, DSE: 

As part of our planning now we factor in climate change scenarios to all of it. We had 

the real life benefit of that during 2002 and 03 and the recent fires in 2006–07 where 

our traditional firefighting mechanisms and the experience of our staff was that they 

were not necessarily holding it on the bad days when you are getting spotting going 

up several kilometres. 891 

While as highlighted below, DSE manage a range of policies and programs 

that provide incidental climate change benefits, the Committee was unable 

to locate any specific “climate change and bushfire” policy on the DSE 

website. Indeed, the Committee was unable to find any policy or planning 

document (the Code of Practice or the draft Wilsons Promontory Ecological 

Strategy for example) which explicitly stated how DSE incorporates climate 

change into their fire prevention and/or suppression management 

processes. 

As previously noted, a range of DSE policies and programs provide indirect 

climate change benefit, particularly adaptation benefits. For example, as the 

spread of weeds is predicted to increase under climate change, any weed 

removal programs aimed at mitigating the threat to biodiversity and social or 

economic assets, are indirectly a form of adaptation measure. Similarly, 

climate change scenarios predict longer, drier summers which will increase 

bushfire risk and subsequently require a higher level of resources for a 

sustained length of time. While seemingly not in direct response to climate 

change, DSE’s decision to increase the number and contract duration for 

Project Fire Fighters enables a greater level of resources to be used for 

prevention and suppression activities. 892 Other initiatives highlighted by DSE 

which illustrate a commitment, direct or indirect, to combating climate 

change include: 

• the use of a risk-based approach targeting high risk communities 

and value assets – based on the OESC Wildfire Project, and 

informed through the Integrated Fire Management Planning; 

• further increasing community awareness and engagement 

• development of a strategic fire break network; 





892 Victorian Government, Submission, no. 168, 4 June 2007, p. Addendum 3.; K. King, Executive 

Director, Land and Fire Management, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Transcript of 


247

RSCH.016.001.0490 


• changing the traditional approach of fire exclusion in Melbourne’s 

water catchments; and 

• reviewing existing land use planning arrangements to better 

incorporate bushfire considerations. 893 

DSE’s submission noted the Department has initiated a Land and 

Biodiversity White Paper (expected in 2009). 894 The aim of the White Paper 

is to establish the future policy direction for natural resource management, 

land health and biodiversity. 895 In April, the Government released its 

Biodiversity Green Paper titled Land and Biodiversity at a Time of Climate 

Change which synthesised its initial consultation and provided suggested 

approaches to a range of issues, including bushfire and ecological 

management. The Green Paper recognises that approaches to fire and 

ecological management need to be flexible to respond to climate change. 896 

Suggestions listed in the Green Paper include: 

• implement strategic fire management to better achieve community protection and 

ecological outcomes as part of planned burning. This may mean a significant 

increase in fire in the landscape and, in some circumstances, allowing fires to run 

their course instead of actively suppressing them; 

• facilitate community understanding and acceptance of the role of fire in the 

landscape by improving community preparedness for dealing with wildfire; 

• broaden the current approach of undertaking more prescribed burning across the 

landscape, including in Melbourne’s water catchments. This carries some risks 

such as reduced water quality and yield but is recognised as important to reducing 

the significant risk of a severe unplanned event; 

• increase fire access and fuel breaks adjacent to high value areas at risk from 

inappropriate fire; 

• consider tighter assessment processes for new and existing settlement growth in 

areas of high fire risk or biodiversity value; 

• integrate fire management into planning processes for landscape rehabilitation; 

and 

• conduct research to better understand the likely effects of climate change on 

managed and natural fire regimes. 897 

The Committee provides in principle support for these suggestions and 

looks forward to seeing them incorporated in the White Paper as 

Government Policy. 

248 



895 Department of Sustainability and Environment, 'Land and biodiversity at a time of climate change - 

Home', viewed 20 May 2008, . 

896 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Land and Biodiversity at a Time of Climate 

Change: Green Paper, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2008, p. 55. 

897 Department of Sustainability and Environment, Land and Biodiversity at a Time of Climate 

Change: Green Paper, Department of Sustainability and Environment, Melbourne, 2008, p. 55.

RSCH.016.001.0491 


The Committee believes that DSE and its partner agencies recognise and 

acknowledge the potential threats associated with climate change. However, 

the Committee notes that DSE has failed to explicitly integrate a requirement 

for climate change consideration into any major fire planning or fire policy 

document. This is of concern to the Committee particularly as climate 

change is likely to require a sustained increase in the level of resources 

required to conduct prevention and suppression activities in the future. In 

addition, as previously highlighted, climate change may lead to ecosystem 

changes which may in turn alter ecosystem fire requirements. For example 

climate change may result in plant species with a higher level of fire 

tolerance becoming prevalent in an ecosystem. As such, the Committee is 

concerned that the potential impact of climate change has not yet been 

explicitly considered in Fire Ecology Strategies. 

Finding 7.3: 

In order to minimise the future risk of fire and facilitate the development of 

appropriate fire regimes, key bushfire management documents, for example, 

the Code of Practice and Fire Ecology Strategies, need to explicitly consider, 

and if necessary, incorporate, the potential impacts of climate change on 

bushfire. 

The report was adopted by the Committee on Monday 23 June 2008. 

249

RSCH.016.001.0492 


250

RSCH.016.001.0493 

Appendices 

Appendix 1 

List of Submissions 

1. Friends of Bass Valley Inc. Landcare Group 

2. Mr Oliver Guthrie 

3. Mrs Beatty Blennerhassett 

4. Mr Daryl Scherger 

5. Mr John McLeish 

6. Mr Tim Shannon 

7. Mr John William Campbell 

8. Building Commission 

9. Victoria State Emergency Service 

10. The Australian Workers’ Union Victorian Branch 

11. Mr Peter Panozzo 

12. Mr Albert Kurt Lance AM 

13. Robin Taylor 

14. Mr Jake de Boer 

15. Mr Michael Schmidt 

16. Mr Michael Poock 

17. Mr Dennis Grundy 

18. M. Lacey 

19. Mr Stephen Mason 

20. Mr Peter Gardner 

21. Mr Gordon Rich-Phillips MLC 

22. Mr Bill Gardner 

23. Mr David Roberts 

24. Buchan Gelantipy Branch of the Victorian Farmers Federation 

25. Mr Steve Markesic 

26. Gippsland Deer Stalkers Association Inc. 

27. North East Catchment Management Authority 

28. Australian Building Codes Board 

29. Ms Lyn Anderson 

30. Mr Bruce Anderson 

251

RSCH.016.001.0494 


31. Mr Ted Cox 

32. Ms Valerie Lippingwell 

33. Ms Frances Ross 

34. Mr Don Pinsent 

35. Mr Alan Allman 

36. Mr Paul La Wilke 

37. Mr John Douglas 

38. Mr Bill Robinson 

39. Mr Mike W. Westbury 

40. Mr Graeme Hodges 

41. Mr Mieke Smits 

42. Mr Joan Heraud 

43. Mr John F. Billings 

44. Mr Francis Gilbert 

45. Ms Renee Gilbert 

46. Mr Peter Smits 

47. T. Dykstra 

48. Mr Robert Dykstra 

49. Ms Kathleen M. Ward 

50. Mr Barry Noble 

51. Mr Malcolm and Mrs Carole Eden 

52. MacAlister Four Wheel Drive Touring and Social Club 

53. Ms Patricia Siddle 

54. Mr Alex Podessor 

55. Grand Ridge Plantations 

56. J.F. Somerville 

57. National Aerial Firefighting Centre 

58. LaTrobe City Council 

59. Hamilton District 4WD Club 

60. Alpine Shire Council 

61. Wannon Water 

62. Western Port Greenhouse Alliance 

63. East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce Inc. 

252

RSCH.016.001.0495 

Appendices 

64. Bairnsdale and District Field Naturalists Club Inc. 

65. Bushwalking Victoria 

66. Mitchell River Catchment Agricultural Business Association 

67. Bushlinks and Bendigo and District Environment Council 

68. Mr Robert Dark 

69. Mr John and Mrs June Anwin 

70. The Friends of Howqua Hills Inc. 

71. Baw Baw Shire Council 

72. Mr Paul Carrick 

73. Mr Kenneth Baxter 

74. Ms Caroline Doolan 

75. Hancock Victorian Plantations 

76. Mr Charlie Schroeder 

77. Mrs Colleen Wood 

78. Ms Johanna Jones 

79. Wellington Shire Council 

80. Hamilton Field Naturalists Club 

81. Mr Tom Napier 

82. Ms Marion Edwards 

83. Ms Elizabeth Knight 

84. Mr David Potts 

85. Ms Freda Harvey 

86. Mr Greg Frantal 

87. Mr Peter Kerlin 

88. Mr Iwao Yoshizaki 

89. Ms Elizabeth Yoshizaki 

90. Ms Christine Karanasios 

91. Ms Leane Maddren 

92. Mr Philip R. Seabrook 

93. Mr John Vasil 

94. Mr Keith McCullough 

95. Mr Ben Johnston 

96. Ms Robyn Grant 

253

RSCH.016.001.0496 


97. Community and Public Sector Union 

98. Ms Patricia Brown 

99. Mr Russell Picton 

100. Mr Norman Endacott 

101. Mr Bill Taylor 

102. Ms Patricia A. Coleman 

103. Mr Alastair Traill 

104. Ms Jennifer Weatherly 

105. J.T. Stone 

106. Ms Michele Assoun 

107. Mr Karl Beavis 

108. Omeo Tambo Valley Country Women’s Association 

109. V Line Passenger Pty. Ltd. 

110. Bendigo Four Wheel Drive Club Inc. 

111. Mr Michael Freshwater 

112. Victorian Farmers Federation 

113. Timber Towns Victoria 

114. Ms Linette Treasure 

115. Professor David Lindenmayer 

116. Friends of the Box-Ironbark Forests (Mount Alexander Region) Inc. 

117. East Gippsland Shire Council 

118. Mr Richard Weatherly 

119. Ms Eve Andre 

120. Moira Shire Council 

121. The Bushfire Front Inc. 

122. Ms Jo Pocklington 

123. Mansfield Shire Council 

124. Mr Alex Hooper 

125. Benalla and District Fire Brigades Group 

126. Warrnambool 4WD Club Inc. 

127. Mr David Eagleson 

128. N. Franklin 

129. Insurance Council of Australia 

254

RSCH.016.001.0497 

Appendices 

130. Bushfire Cooperative Research Centre 

131. Ms Ros Ellen 

132. Mr Eric Clyde Thomas 

133. Tourism Alliance Victoria 

134. Mr Leon Azkin 

135. West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority 

136. Mr Gavin Jamieson 

137. Dr Kevin Tolhurst 

138. Institute of Foresters Australia 

139. Mr Peter Halasz 

140. The Wilderness Society Victoria Inc. 

141. Mr Mack Stagg 

142. Murrindindi Shire Council 

143. Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner 

144. Barwon Water 

145. Gippsland Environment Group 

146. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Australian 

Government 

147. Mr Ivan T. Prentice 

148. Goulburn-Murray Water 

149. Ms Helen Gay 

150. Mr Henk van Leeuwen 

151. Macedon Ranges Shire Council 

152. J.L. Tutt 

153. Mr Neville G. Ford 

154. Mr David Packham OAM 

155. Ms Emma Sambrooks 

156. Southern Grampians Shire Council 

157. Mr Nick Barton 

158. Great Southern Limited 

159. Mr Richard Goonan 

160. Mr Noel Gunn 

161. Northern Grampians Shire Council 

255

RSCH.016.001.0498 


162. Mr Fraser and Mrs Penny Barry 

163. Mr and Mrs Alan and Heather Stuart 

164. East Gippsland Bird Observers Club 

165. East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority 

166. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation 

167. Grampians Asset Protection 

168. Victorian Government 

169. Mr and Mrs Bruce and Ann McGregor 

170. Mrs Geraldine Ryan 

171. Cobboboonee Community Forest Group 

172. Royal Society for the Protection of Cruelty to Animals 

173. Wildlife Victoria 

174. Victorian Association of Forest Industries 

175. International Association of Wildland Fire 

176. Australasian Fire Authorities Council 

177. Mr Peter M. Attiwell 

178. Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria 

179. Ms Gillian Rayner 

180. Shire of Yarra Ranges 

181. Municipal Association of Victoria 

182. Rural City of Wangaratta 

183. Mr Les Lasham 

184. Mr Simon Paton (The Stretton Group) 

185. North Central Catchment Management Authority 

186. Wombat Forest Care 

187. Push for the Bush 

188. Mr John Hermans 

189. Victorian Four Wheel Drive Club Inc. 

190. Victorian National Parks Association 

191. Victorian Apiarists Association 

192. Gippsland Apiarists 

193. Miss Clara Davies 

194. Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority 

256

RSCH.016.001.0499 

Appendices 

195. Goongerah Environment Group 

196. North East Deer Stalkers Association 

197. Otway Conservation Council 

198. Victorian Recreational Fishing 

199. Dingo Care Network 

200. CGU Insurance 

201. Forest Fire Victoria Inc. 

202. Ms Annie Marlow 

203. Mr Kevin Broome 

204. Mr Graeme Birkett 

205. Victoria Police 

206. Mr Neil Barraclough 

207. Australasian Assembly of Volunteer Fire Brigade Associations Inc. 

208. Mr David Evans 

209. Mr Rod Incoll AFSM 

210. Ms Margo Sietsma 

211. High Country Councils Coalition 

212. Mr Jim Crebbin 

213. Victorian Wine Industry Association 

214. Timber Communities Australia 

215. Mr George Wright 

216. Horsham Rural City Council 

217. East Gippsland Wildlife Taskforce 

218. Alpine Resorts Co-ordinating Council 

219. Mr Steve Mathews 

220. Sunraysia Apiarists Association 

221. Department of Transport and Regional Services, Australian Government 

222. Mr David Thompson 

223. Ms Jennie Malloy 

224. Grampians-Wimmera Mallee Water 

225. Environment East Gippsland Inc. 

226. Bushtrek 4WD Club 

227. J. & S. Garbutt 

257

RSCH.016.001.0500 


228. Mr Martyn Paterson 

229. Dr Ben Miller 

230. Ms Kellie Gee 

231. Dr David A. Hucker 

232. Red Eagle 

233. Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria 

234. Mr Ken and Mrs Cathryn Lamb 

235. Mr Maurie Kileen 

236. Mr Michael Dennis 

237. Mr Piers Hartley 

238. NSW Rural Fire Service 

239. Ms Irene Elson-Derry Probert 

240. Mr Jim Missen 

241. Mr John G. Brown AO 

242. Hattah Association 

243. Plantations North East Inc. 

244. Ms Carolyn Copely 

245. National Association of Forest Industries 

246. Mr Jack Whadcoat 

247. Nillumbik Shire Council 

248. Mr Peter Crisp MLA, Member for Mildura 

249. Ms Jenny Macmillan and Mr Doug Fraser 

250. Lovick Family 

251. Mr Rob Martin 

252. Mr Graeme Stoney 

253. Ms Wendy Jubb Stoney 

254. Mr Gilbert Rothe 

255. Mr Graeme Connley 

256. Mr Ross Walker 

257. Mr Daryl Cameron 

258

RSCH.016.001.0501 

Appendices 

Appendix 2 

List of Proforma Submissions 

1. S. Hayden Absolom 

2. Mr Dearne Albert 

3. Mr Ian J. Albert 

4. Ms Sharon Alexander 

5. Mr Doug Alexander 

6. Mr Trevor Alexander 

7. Ms Carolyn Allan 

8. Mr R. Allen 

9. Mr Jeff Anderson 

10. Ms Jodie Anderson 

11. Mr Robert Anderson 

12. Ms Nikki Andrews 

13. Ms Deb Annis 

14. Mr Peter Appleby 

15. Ms Adele Armet 

16. Mr Jason Ashdown 

17. Mr Jim Ashford 

18. Ms Tabatha Ashlin 

19. Mr Geoff Atkins 

20. Mr Peter Ayres 

21. Mr David Backman 

22. Ms Stacey Bader 

23. Mr A. Badge 

24. Ms Karen Backman 

25. Mr Bruce Bailey 

26. Mr Stan Balfour 

27. Ms Terina Barbour 

28. Ms Jessica Lee Bardebes 

29. Ms Julie-Anne Bardebes 

30. Ms Sandra Bardebes 

31. Mr Hayden Barker 

32. Mr Kenneth Barnard 

33. Ms Samantha Barnard 

34. Mr Warren Barnes 

35. Mr Ross L. Baron 

36. Mr Matt Beath 

37. Ms Robyn Beath 

38. Ms Kathleen Beaton 

39. Mr Klaus Beck 

40. Mr David Beddy 

41. Mr Ian Bell 

42. Ms Lyn Bell 

43. Mr Bruce Bennett 

44. Ms Rosey Bennett 

45. R. Bennett 

46. Mr Darren Birthisel 

47. Ms Allison Bishoff 

48. Ms Jan Bishop 

49. Mrs Louise Boldiston 

50. Mr Rob Boldiston 

51. Ms Donna Boulton 

52. Mr Chris Bourne 

53. Ms Kate Bowden 

54. Mr Christopher Box 

55. Ms Jean Box 

56. Ms Kerralee Boxshall 

57. Mr P.F. Brennan 

58. Ms Michele Bradley-Smith 

59. Mr Graeme Bridges 

60. Mr R.F. Briggs 

61. Mr Josh Blain 

62. Mr David Broacota 

63. Mr Matthew Broad 

64. Mr Alan Broadbent 

65. Mr M Brotherton 

66. Ms Caroline Brown 

67. G.B. Davies Brown 

68. Mr Harold Keith Brown 

69. Ms Joanne Brown 

70. Mr Rob J. Brown 

71. Mr Matt Bruce 

72. Mr B. Brullo 

73. Ms Elaine H. Bruton 

74. Mr Peter Bruton 

75. Mr Daniel Buckley 

76. Mr Owen Budge 

77. Ms Sandra Budge 

78. Ms Christine Burcombe 

79. Mrs Dorothy Burgess 

80. Mr S.B. Burgess 

81. Ms Sarah Burghardt-Smyth 

82. Ms Michelle Burrowes 

83. G.N. Bush 

84. Dallas Bye 

85. Ms Maree Buys 

86. Mr Bill Byrne 

87. Mr Brian Byrne 

88. Mr Martin Byrne 

89. Ms Ebony Caccianiga 

90. Mr Tom Cahn 

259

RSCH.016.001.0502 


91. Mr Mark Calder 

92. Mr Brian Campbell 

93. Ms Ruth Campbell 

94. Ms Colleen Cane 

95. Mr Michael Cane 

96. Mr Matthew Carey 

97. R. Carmody 

98. Mr Benjamin James Carpenter 

99. Ms Debbie Carstairs 

100. Ms Laura Carstairs 

101. Mr Craig Casbolt 

102. Ms Marny Casbolt 

103. Ms Amy Cashman 

104. Mr Rod Castles 

105. Ms Dijana Chambers 

106. Ms Sasha Chambers 

107. Ms Kaye Chapman 

108. Ms Theresa Charles 

109. Mr Andrew Cherry 

110. R. Chmelik 

111. Mr Wayne Claridge 

112. Mr David Clark 

113. Ms Jacky Clark 

114. Mr Richard Clark 

115. Ms Petrina Clarke 

116. Ms Cass Cooksey 

117. Mr Adam Clooney 

118. Mr Alan Close 

119. Mr Alex Coleman 

120. Ms Bridgette Coleman 

121. Mr Des Coleman 

122. Mr James Coleman 

123. Ms Julie Coleman 

124. Ms Josephine Coleman 

125. Mr Mark Coleman 

126. Ms Meg Coleman 

127. Ms Sandra Coleman 

128. Ms Tania Coleman 

129. Mr William Coleman 

130. Mr Peter Collins 

131. Mr Bruce Commins 

132. Ms Genevieve Commins 

133. Ms Kate Commins 

134. Mr David Conway 

135. Ms Aleesha Cook 

136. Ms Andrea Cook 

137. Mr Anthony Cook 

138. Mr Danny Cook 

139. Ms Jacqui Cook 

140. Mr Nick Cook 

141. Ms Pauline Cook 

142. Ms Sharon Cook 

143. Robyn Cooke 

144. Mr Chris Cooper 

145. Ms Janine Cooper 

146. Mr Michael Cormack 

147. Franco Corsini 

148. Ms Jessica Coster 

149. Ms Michelle Coster 

150. Ms Kate Coulson 

151. Ms Maxine Coulson 

152. Mr Michael Cox 

153. Ms Maree Crisp 

154. Mr Scott Crisp 

155. Mr Sam Crispo 

156. Mr Gavin Crockford 

157. Ms Amanda Crombie 

158. Ms Kelly Crombie 

159. Ms Maddie Crombie 

160. Mr Dave Crone 

161. Mr David Cunningham 

162. Mr Dennis Curley 

163. Mr Phillip Curmi 

164. Mr M.T. Dale 

165. Mr Richard Dale 

166. Ms Shona Davidson 

167. Ms Elwyn Davies 

168. Mr G.E. Davies 

169. Mr Allan Day 

170. Mr Geoff Day 

171. Mr Joe Delaney 

172. Ms Yvette Demir 

173. Ms Karen Dentry 

174. Mr Steve Deppeler 

175. Mr Brenton Deveney 

176. Ms Melissa Dobbin 

177. Ms Kerry D. Dooley 

178. Mr John Douglas 

179. Ms Melinda Douglas 

180. Mr Mick Donahue 

181. Ms Marian Dowling 

182. Ms Kylie Downey 

183. Les T. Downey 

184. Mr Rod Downey 

185. Ms Caroline Den Drijver 

186. Mr Kevin Duffy 

187. Mr David Dalzell 

188. Mr Mick Duncan 

189. Mr Terry Duncan 

190. Ms Roslyn Dunsfarm 

260

RSCH.016.001.0503 

Appendices 

191. Mr Paul Durand 

192. Dixie Dwyer 

193. Mr Peter Dwyer 

194. Mr Bob Dykstra 

195. Ms Tia Dykstra 

196. Mr Nick Ednie 

197. Mr G. Egan 

198. Mr Ben Elliot 

199. Mr Damien Elliott 

200. Mr Scott Elliott 

201. Mr David Elphick 

202. Mr Greg Elphick 

203. Mr Jason Elphick 

204. Mr David Endacott 

205. C. Escreet 

206. Ms Gemma Escreet 

207. Mr R. Escreet 

208. Mr Jason Evans 

209. Mr Anthony Exner 

210. Ms Ashlee Exner 

211. Ms Jenni Exner 

212. Mr Craig Exton 

213. Ms Sally Exton 

214. Mr S. Failla 

215. Mr Ian Fargher 

216. Mr David Farrell 

217. Mr Richard Fawaz 

218. Mr Frank Field 

219. Mr Anthony Ferrari 

220. Ms Debra Ferrari 

221. Mr Michael Ferris 

222. Mr Merv Fisher 

223. Mr John Fitzgerald 

224. Mr Ashley Fletcher 

225. Mr Darren Flett 

226. Ms Jasmyn Flett 

227. Kerry Flett 

228. Mr Anthony Fulford 

229. Ms Anne-Maree Forge 

230. Mr Graham Forge 

231. Mr Ian Forge 

232. R. Farrell 

233. Mr Jay Fowler 

234. Ms Bev Fraser 

235. Mr John Fraser 

236. Mr Mathew Fraser 

237. Mr Andrew Frauenfelder 

238. Ms Tamara Freeman 

239. Ms Marlene Freeman 

240. Arch French 

241. Mr Michael Fueuly 

242. Mr Jason Fulford 

243. Ms Julie Fuller 

244. Mr Steve Fulton 

245. Ms Natalie Furlong 

246. Mr Wes Furlong 

247. Mr Cody Gair 

248. Ms Kylie Gallagher 

249. Mr John Galtier 

250. Ms Jody Galway 

251. Mr Trevor Gatens 

252. Ms Cathy Gay 

253. Mr Corie Gay 

254. Mr Bryan Gell 

255. Ms Jessica Gell 

256. Mr Murray George 

257. Mr Ashley Gephart 

258. Mr Justin Gibb 

259. Mr Robert Gilder 

260. Mr Andrew Giles 

261. Mr Kelvyn Gill 

262. Mr Tristram Girdler 

263. Mr Alan Goldsworthy 

264. Ms Melissa Goodman 

265. Mr Andrew Graham 

266. J.S Gramlid 

267. Ms Beth J. Green 

268. Ms Christine Green 

269. Ms Karen Green 

270. Lyndall Green 

271. Ms Rebecca Greening 

272. Mr Bruce Gregory 

273. Mr Malcolm Gregory 

274. Mr B. Gay 

275. Mr Charlie Gruer 

276. Mr Ben Guzzardi 

277. Mr John Hague 

278. Mr Ben Hall 

279. Christine Hall 

280. Ms Ebony Hall 

281. Mr John Hall 

282. Ms Nanette Hall 

283. P. Hall 

284. Mr Steve Hall 

285. Mr Neville Ham 

286. Ms Michelle Hampton 

287. D. Handley 

288. Mr D.J. Hansen 

289. Mr Glenn Hardiman 

290. Mr Rod Hargreaves 

261

RSCH.016.001.0504 


291. Mr Brett Harrison 

292. Ms Beth Harvey 

293. K. Harvey 

294. Ms Jenny Haw 

295. Mr Mark Haxby 

296. Mr Gregory Hayes 

297. Ms Yvonne Henderson 

298. Mr Travis Hetherton 

299. Mr Peter Hickey 

300. Mr Tim Hickford 

301. Mr Graeme Hicks 

302. A.J. Higgins 

303. Mr Barry Higgins 

304. Mr Brian Higgins 

305. Ms Emma Higgins 

306. Ms Kayla Higgins 

307. Mr Kevin Higgins 

308. Ms Kylie Higgins 

309. Mr M.W. Higgins 

310. Mr Michael Higgins 

311. Ms Rachel Higgins 

312. Ms Sandra Higgins 

313. Mr Steven Higgins 

314. Ms Terry Higgins 

315. Mr John Hill 

316. J. Hill 

317. Mr Ben Hillman 

318. Robyn Hinves 

319. Mr Matthew Hoare 

320. Mr Clive Hodge 

321. Mr Don Hodgkinson 

322. Ms Sandra Hodgkinson 

323. Mr Eddie Hoffman 

324. Ms Faye Hoffman 

325. Terry Hogan 

326. Mr Andrew Hollows 

327. Ms Erin Hooker 

328. Ms Jodie Hooker 

329. Mr Brendan Hooper 

330. Ms Wendy Howe 

331. Ms Emily Hunt 

332. G.J. Hurley 

333. Ms Rachel Ingromille 

334. Ms Margaret Iseppi 

335. Ms Jayde Jackson 

336. Mr Rhys Jackson 

337. Ms Karen James 

338. Mr Robert James 

339. Ms Tracey James 

340. Ms Wendy Jamieson 

341. Ash Jamieson 

342. Mr Neil Jamieson 

343. Mr Johnny Jans 

344. Chris Jenkins 

345. Mr R.L. Jenkins 

346. Mr Graham Jensen 

347. Mr Rob Johnson 

348. Ms Ronda Johnson 

349. Pat Johnston 

350. Mr Robert Jones 

351. Ms Sonja Jones 

352. Ms Nadine Jorgensen 

353. Mr Daryn Joy 

354. Ms Kathy Junor 

355. Mr Andrew Kee 

356. Mr Bill Kelly 

357. Mr Bob Kelly 

358. Mr Colin Kelly 

359. Mr Dean A Kelly 

360. Ms Paula Kelly 

361. Mr Peter Kelly 

362. Mr Sean Kelly 

363. Mr Simone Kelly 

364. Mr Wayne Kelly 

365. M. Kerr 

366. Mr Brendan Ketteringham 

367. Mr James Kiely 

368. Ms Leanne Kiely 

369. Mr Ted Kilner 

370. Mr Alex King 

371. Mr Paul Kingsmill 

372. Ms Sue Kite 

373. Mr Robert Klienert 

374. Mr David Kneebone 

375. Mr Brad Knight 

376. Ms Melissa Knight 

377. Ms Ros Knight 

378. Ms J.M. Koska 

379. Mr Ross Kosto 

380. Hasso Krueger 

381. Vialda Krueger 

382. Mr Eddie Lafferty 

383. Ms Christine Lakeman 

384. Ms Mariah Lakeman 

385. Mr Anthony Lamb 

386. Mr John Lamont 

387. Mr Kane Lamperd 

388. Mr Brett Lancaster 

389. Mr Rick Land 

390. Ms Gemma Laughton 

262

RSCH.016.001.0505 

Appendices 

391. Mr Adrian Leach 

392. Mr Andrew Leach 

393. Ms Bethany Leach 

394. Mr Paul Leadbetter 

395. Mr Dwayne Lee 

396. Mr Matthew Lee 

397. Ms Sophie Leith 

398. Mr Jarrod Leontini 

399. Mr Daniel Letunica 

400. Ms Christine Lindsey 

401. Mr Sean Linley 

402. Mr Duane Lipman 

403. Mr Philip Llewellyn 

404. Mr Bill Lockhart 

405. Mr Lindsay Lockhart 

406. Mr Greg Lockwood 

407. Mr Dennis Lowe 

408. Ms Suzannah Macbeth 

409. Ms Lisa MacDonald 

410. Mr Wayne MacDonald 

411. Mr Brendan MacGregor 

412. Ms Therese Mack 

413. Mr Graeme Mackay 

414. Mr Greg MacKenzie 

415. Bernie MacManus 

416. Mr Mick MacManus 

417. Mr David Madden 

418. Ms Elizabeth Madden 

419. Mr Bill Maddren 

420. Reg Maher 

421. Mr Ben Mahon 

422. Mr Julian Mahon 

423. Ms Jacki Malady 

424. Mr Tony Mapleson 

425. Ms Julie Marland 

426. Ms Leanne Marriott 

427. Mr Vern Marriott 

428. Mr Paul Marsden 

429. Mr Mick Marshall 

430. Mr Chris Martin 

431. Mr Izak Martin 

432. Ms Lee Martin 

433. Mr Paul Mason 

434. Ms Kate Matheson 

435. Ms Jean Mawhurriey 

436. Mr Dennis McBain 

437. Ms Zanni McCall 

438. Mr Bernard McCarthy 

439. Mr Owen McCarthy 

440. D. McCauley 

441. Ms Joy McCauley 

442. Mr Anthony McCluskey 

443. Mr Bruce McCormack 

444. Mr Rodney McGrath 

445. Brooke McInerney 

446. Mr Bill McInnes 

447. Mr David McIntyre 

448. Ms Debra McIntyre 

449. Mr Luke McKenzie 

450. Ms Sylvia McKenzie 

451. Mr Stephen McLean 

452. Mr Brad McMahon 

453. Mr Peter McMahon 

454. Ms Rita McMahon 

455. Ms Rhonda McMillan 

456. Mr Bob McRae 

457. Mr Ken McRae 

458. Mr Jon Meany 

459. Mr Paul Metcher 

460. Ms Lauren Millar 

461. Mr Colin Milligan 

462. Mr Matt Missen 

463. T. Mitchell 

464. Mr Cameron Mitton 

465. Mr Peter Monds 

466. Mr Greg Moon 

467. Ms Rhonda Moon 

468. Ms Christina Moore 

469. Mr David Moore 

470. Ms Katherine Moore 

471. Ms Lizzie Moore 

472. Mr Neil Moore 

473. Ms Susan Morgan 

474. Ms Laurie Morison 

475. Mr Stewart Moroney 

476. Mr Frank Moss 

477. Mr Jake Mounsey 

478. Ms Melissa Mounsey 

479. Ms Haylee Munnings 

480. Ms Linda Munnings 

481. Mr Phil Munnings 

482. Mr G.W. Murphy 

483. Mr Shane Murphy 

484. Mr R. Needham 

485. Mr S. Newton 

486. Mr Brad Nicholson 

487. Mr Fred Nicholson 

488. Ms Vanessa Nicholson 

489. Ms Joyce Nicolajevo 

490. Ms Catherine Noble 

263

RSCH.016.001.0506 


491. Mr Clemens Nota 

492. Mr Christopher Notts 

493. Ms Diane Oatley 

494. Mr Edward O'Brien 

495. Mr Donald O'Brien 

496. Mr Maurice O'Brien 

497. Pat O'Brien 

498. Mr Jason Odlun 

499. Mr David Olsson 

500. Faye Olsson 

501. Mr Philip O'Mara 

502. Mr Adam Osborne 

503. Ms Margaret Owen 

504. Mr Ronald Owen 

505. Mr & Mrs I. and K. Pahl 

506. Mr Peter Pahl 

507. Mr John Palmer 

508. Ms Belinda Parr 

509. Ms Rhiannon Parry 

510. Mr Richard Paterson 

511. Glen Patten 

512. Ms Maureen Pearce 

513. Mr Ray Pearson 

514. Ms Sharon Pelham 

515. S.A. Penny 

516. Ms Dorothy Perry 

517. Mr Michael Perry 

518. Ms Kelly Pettifer 

519. Mr Matt Pettifer 

520. Mr Simon Pettifer 

521. Ms Stacey Pettifer 

522. Ms Leonie Phelan 

523. Ms Jean Phillips 

524. Ms Lyn Phillips 

525. Ms Steph Phillips 

526. Ms Andrea Pickett 

527. Mr Graham Pickett 

528. Mr Adrian Pigdon 

529. Ms Gemma Pilbeam 

530. Ms Lynette Pilbeam 

531. Frances Potter 

532. Mr Mick Potter 

533. Mr Andrew Powell 

534. Mr Mark Price 

535. Mr Richard Quilford 

536. Mr Benn Quine 

537. Mr Shane Quine 

538. Mr Aaron Ralph 

539. Mr Jim Ralph 

540. Mr Scott Ray 

541. Ms Kate Rees 

542. Ms Lynn Rees 

543. Ms Lisa Reeves 

544. Ms Sharon Reilly 

545. Mr David Renkin 

546. Ms Kirsty Renkin 

547. Mr Ian Richards 

548. M Richardson 

549. Ms Amy Ridgway 

550. Mr Daryl and Ms Karen Ridley 

551. Ms Sherie Rigby 

552. Mr Greg Robb 

553. Mr Kevin Roberts 

554. Ms Bronwyn Robinson 

555. Ms Cheryl Robinson 

556. Mr David Robinson 

557. Ms Eleisha Robinson 

558. Mr Jamie Robinson 

559. Mr Jeff Robinson 

560. Mr John Robinson 

561. Mr Max Robinson 

562. Ms Megan Rodaughan 

563. Miss M. Rose 

564. Ms Loris Rossit 

565. Mr Alex Rouse 

566. Mr Jonathan Rowley 

567. Ms Sara Rowtes 

568. Mr Andrew Russell 

569. Ms Julie Rust 

570. C. Salmon 

571. Ms Heather Saunders 

572. Mr Jim Saunders 

573. Mr Stephen Savage 

574. Ms Annette Schmelzle 

575. Mr Stephen Schmelzle 

576. Mr Daryl Scott 

577. Mr Frank Sedgman 

578. Ms Kath Shelton 

579. Mr Kevin Shelton 

580. Yukiko Shinozuka 

581. Ms Clare Shirgles 

582. Mr Brad Shirgles 

583. Ms Aleshia Sievers 

584. Ms Hannah Simkin 

585. Mr Craig Sloan 

586. Ms Jan Smart 

587. Mr Ben Smith 

588. Mr Darren Smith 

589. Ms Kate Smith 

590. Ms Lois Smith 

264

RSCH.016.001.0507 

Appendices 

591. Mr Rick Smith 

592. Ms Joan Smyk 

593. Ms Pat Smyth 

594. Ms Angela and Mr Ian 

Sneddon 

595. Mr Peter Solovan 

596. Ms Joanne Sparey 

597. Mr Matt Sporton 

598. Mr Luke Stagg 

599. Ms Megan Stanton 

600. P.J. Steffen 

601. Ms Bev Stephens 

602. Ms Julie Stephens 

603. Mr Noel Stephens 

604. Mr David Stevenson 

605. Merryn Stevenson 

606. Mr Paul Stevenson 

607. Ms Karalyn Stewart 

608. Ms Melanie Stewart 

609. Mr Kevin Stoner 

610. Ms Kim Sturgeon 

611. Mr Jodi Swan 

612. Mr Michael Sweeney 

613. Jae Taylor 

614. Mr James Thomas 

615. Mr George V. Thomas 

616. Ms Liz Thomas 

617. Mr Jacob Tilley 

618. Mr Stephen Tilley 

619. Mr Luke Tilly 

620. Mr Phillip Tonkin 

621. Mr Michael Towan 

622. Ms Kylie Traill 

623. Mr Wayne Traill 

624. Mr Mat Traill 

625. Mr Ben Treasure 

626. Mr David Treasure 

627. Ms Fiona Treasure 

628. Ms Jenny Treasure 

629. Mr R.M. Treasure 

630. Mr Brian Trippett 

631. Ms Jenny Tuffen 

632. Ms Maria Tulloch 

633. Mr Peter Tulloch 

634. Ms Donna Tumilson 

635. Mr Dave Tumlinson 

636. Mr Cory Turp 

637. Ms Stacey Turp 

638. Mr Wayne Van Den Dolder 

639. Mr Mark Van Diemen 

640. Mr Eric Vandam 

641. Mr Nathan Vanderheyden 

642. Mr Ryan Vandervalk 

643. Ms Pauline Venn 

644. Ms Janina Vikis 

645. Ms Alison Vile 

646. Mr David Vile 

647. Ms Heather Vile 

648. Mr Ronald Vile 

649. Mr Henry Viles 

650. Ms Tricia Vuillermin 

651. Col Wadey 

652. Mr John Walker 

653. Mr Mark Walker 

654. Mr Paul Walker 

655. Ms Sharon Walker 

656. Ms Tracey Wallis 

657. W. Walravens 

658. Marnie Warek 

659. Ms Debbie Warren 

660. Mr Graeme Warren 

661. Mr Laurence Webb 

662. Ms Mary Webb 

663. D.J. Wegmann 

664. Mr Rick Welch 

665. Mr Daniel Wells 

666. Mr John Wellsmore 

667. J.W. West 

668. Ms Frances Westbury 

669. Mr Jim Wheeler 

670. Ms Nola Wheeler 

671. N. Willaton 

672. Mr Clive Whitby 

673. Ms Helen Whitby 

674. Mr Jason White 

675. Ms Julie White 

676. Ms Courtney Whitehead 

677. M.E. Whitten 

678. Mr Peter Whittington 

679. Ms Terrianne Whittington 

680. Ms Barbara Wilcox 

681. Mr Russell Wilcox 

682. Ms Anne Williams 

683. Mr Brendan Williams 

684. Ms Cassie Williams 

685. Mr Craig Williams 

686. Mr D. Williams 

687. Ms Kirsty Williams 

688. Mr Matt Williams 

689. Mr Steve Williams 

265

RSCH.016.001.0508 


690. Mr Trevor Williams 

691. Mr Anthony Williamson 

692. Ms Kelly Williamson 

693. Mr R.M. Williamson 

694. Mr Neil Wilson 

695. Mr Luke Wishart 

696. Mr Alan Witchell 

697. Ms Bridie Witchell 

698. Mr Jim Witherow 

699. Mr Peter Wojcinski 

700. Mr Brent Woll 

701. Ms Catherine Wood 

702. Mr Neil Wood 

703. Mr Dean Woodberry 

704. Renae Woodford 

705. Ms Emma Wylie 

706. Mr Ian Wyllie 

707. Mr Scott Wylie 

708. Ms Kelly Wynne 

709. Mr Pascale Yeates 

710. Mr Colin Young 

711. Mr Dean Young 

712. Ms Diane Young 

713. Mr John Young 

714. Ms Maree Young 

715. Mr G.J. Younger 

716. Ms Lee Anne Yuill 

717. Ms Deanna Zeally 

718. Mr Peter Zmood 

719. Ms Sharon Zmoo 

266

RSCH.016.001.0509 

Appendices 

Appendix 3 

List of Public Hearings 

Mr Neil Bibby, Chief Executive Officer 

Mr Russell Rees, Chief Officer 

Country Fire Authority 

MELBOURNE - 4 June 2007 

Mr Greg Hayes, Manager, Emergency Management 

Department of Primary Industries 

Mr Liam Fogarty, Assistant Fire Officer 

Mr Peter Harris, Secretary 

Mr Ken King, Executive Director, Land and Fire Management 

Mr Ewan Waller, Chief Fire Officer, Fire and Emergency Management 


Mr Eamonn Kelly, General Manager 

Melbourne Water Corporation 

Mr Bruce Esplin, Emergency Services Commissioner 

Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner 

Mr Ian Christie, Director, Fire and Emergency Services 


Mr Cameron McDonald, Director, Logistics and Operations 

VicForests 

KINGLAKE – 18 June 2007 

Mr Geoff Conway, Operations Manager, Region 13 

Mr Peter Creak, Operations Manager, Region 12 


Mr Andy Daly, Municipal Fire Prevention Officer 

Cr Bob Flowers, Mayor 

Murrindindi Shire Council 

267

RSCH.016.001.0510 


HALLS GAP – 3 July 2007 

Mr John Athorn, Operations Manager, Region 16 

Mr Michael Boatman, Manager, Community Safety, Midlands Wimmera 

Area 

Mr Colin Andrews, Acting Captain, Halls Gap Rural Fire Brigade 


Mr Brian Hamer, Bushfire Recovery Manager, Grampians Region 

Department of Human Services 


Mr Ian Voigt, Regional Director, South West 


Cr Roslyn McInnes 

Horsham Rural City Council 

Ms Prue Pike, President 

Mrs Margo Sietsma, Member 

Friends of the Grampians/Gariwerd 

Mr Martin Duke, Manager, Infrastructure Development 

Mr Peter Rogers, Manager, Infrastructure Support 

Northern Grampians Shire Council 

Mr Rod Newnham, Regional Manager, West 


Mr Kevin Erwin 

Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria 

Mr Barry Clugston 

Mr Colin Holmes 

Ms Amanda Stevens 

Mr Mike Stevens 

Mr David Thompson 

268

RSCH.016.001.0511 

Appendices 

DUNKELD – 4 July 2007 

Ms Heather McIntyre, Communications Officer, Victoria Valley Brigade 


Mr Don Arnold, Land and Biodiversity Program Manager 

Mr Leigh Heard, Chair, Biodiversity Advisory Committee 

Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority 

Mr Bill Crawford 

Mr Anthony Heard 

Mr Simon Armytage 

Grampians Asset Protection 

Mr Gary Harper, Manager, Assets 

Grampians Wimmera Mallee Water 

Mr Reto Zollinger, Vice President 

Mr J. Cayley, President 

Hamilton Field Naturalists Club 

Cr Coralie Coulson 

Cr Michael Leeming, Mayor 

Mr John Maine, Acting Director, Physical Services 

Cr Don Robertson 

Southern Grampians Shire Council 

Mr Noel Gunn 

Mr Roger Hallam 

Mr Doug Slattery 

Mrs Jennifer Weatherley 

Mr Richard Weatherley 

269

RSCH.016.001.0512 


MELBOURNE – 16 July 2007 

Mr Kevin O'Loughlin, Chief Executive Officer 

Bushfire CRC 

Mr Norm Free, Policy Advisor Emergency Management 

Municipal Association of Victoria 

Mr Scott Gentle, Victorian State Manager 

Timber Communities Australia 

Dr Kevin Tolhurst, Senior Lecturer, Fire and Ecology Management 

University of Melbourne 

Mr Simon Ramsay, President 

Victorian Farmers Federation 

BAIRNSDALE – 16 July 2007 

Mr James Turner, Vice President 

Ms Pat McPherson, President 

Bairnsdale and District Field Naturalists Club Inc 

Ms Heather Livingstone, President, Buchan/Gelantipy Branch 


Mr Greg Flynn, Area HQ & Region 10 HQ 

Mr Bryan Russell, Operations Manager, Region 11 

Mr Peter Schmidt, General Manager, Gippsland 


Mr Neville Penrose, Regional Director, Gippsland Region 

Mr David Tainsh, Regional Fire Manager, Gippsland 



Mr Graeme Dear, Chief Executive Officer 

East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority 

Mr Graeme Connley, Member 

Mr John Mulligan, President 

Mr Gilbert Rothe, Member 

Mrs Mary Stevens, Secretary 

East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce 

Mr Neil Barraclough 

Gippsland Apiarists Association 

270

RSCH.016.001.0513 

Appendices 

Mr Rohan Bilney 

Mr Roger Bilney 

Gippsland Environment Group 

Mr Steve Kozlowski 

High Country Councils Coalition 

Mr Chris Rose, Regional Manager, East 


Mr Allan McPherson, Acting Executive Director / Water Industry 

Mr Clinton Rodda, General Manager, Water Supply 

Southern Rural Water 

Mr Barry Vaughan, Regional Manager, East Gippsland 

VicForests 

Mr Kevin Barling 

Mr Kevin Broome 

Mr Rob Grant 

Mr Ken Stuart 

Mr Paul Carrick 

HEYFIELD – 1 August 2007 

Mr Jim Missen, Captain, Winnindoo Fire Brigade 


Mr Ralph Barraclough 

Mr Michael Dennis 

Mr Kevin Higgins 

Mr Alex Hooper, QFSM, ASFM 

Mr Maurie Killeen 

Mr Barry Noble 

271

RSCH.016.001.0514 


TRARALGON – 2 August 2007 



Mr Phil Whiteman, Planning Manager 

Grand Ridge Plantations 

Mr John Cribbes, Honorary Secretary 

Macalister Four Wheel Drive Club 

Ms Colleen Wood, Wildlife Carer 

Southern Ash Wildlife Shelter 

Mr Clinton Rodda, General Manager, Water Supply 

Southern Rural Water 

Cr Malcolm Hole, President 

Timber Towns Victoria 

Mr Jim Wilson, Director Corporate Services 

Wellington Shire Council 

Mr Geoff Hocking, Chief Executive Officer 

West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority 

Mr Kenneth Baxter 

Mr Mark Coleman 

Mrs Patricia Coleman 

Mr Ken Lamb 

Mr John O'Brien 

Mr Ivan Prentice 

272

RSCH.016.001.0515 

Appendices 

MACEDON – 20 August 2007 

Mr Stuart Fraser, Convenor 

Mr Stanislaw Pelczynski 

Bendigo and District Environment Council 

Mr John Deering, Operations Manager, Region 14 

Mr James Fox, Acting General Manager, Outer Metro North West 


Mr Ian Voigt, Regional Director, South West 

Mr Ewan Waller, Chief Fire Officer - Fire and Emergency Management 


Mr Frank Panter, Vice President 

Friends of the Box-Ironbark Forests Inc. 

Mr Malcolm Tonkin, Manager - Stewardship and Asset Programs, Ballarat 

District 

Hancock Victorian Plantations Pty Ltd 

Mr Lachlan Milne, Environment Resource Officer 

Macedon Shire Ranges Council 

Mr Trevor Miles, Regional Manager, Central 


Mr Gavin Jamieson 

Mr Robert McDonald 

273

RSCH.016.001.0516 


Dr Peter Hairsine 

CSIRO Land and Water 

MELBOURNE – 27 August 2007 

Dr Mick Meyer 

CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research 

Dr Dick Williams, Research Scientist/Deputy Program Leader 

CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems 

Mr Jim Gould 

CSIRO/ENSIS 

Mr Tony Manderson 

Mr Bill Middleton 

Mr Athol Hodgson, President 

Mr Rod Incoll 

Forest Fire Victoria Inc 

Mr Simon Paton 

Mr Stuart McArthur 

The Stretton Group 

274 

OUYEN – 27 August 2007 

Ms Bill Johnstone, Operations Manager, Region 18 

Mr Pat O'Brien, General Manager, North West Area 

Mr Trevor Wyatt, Group Officer, Murrayville Group 


Mr Tony Edgar, Regional Director, North West 


Mr Alec Dowlsey 

Mr Wayne Eggleton 

Mr Ray Stone, Secretary 

Hattah Association 

Mr Rod Newnham, Regional Manager, West 


Mr Peter Crisp, MP, Member for Mildura 

Parliament of Victoria 

Mr Howard Crothers, President / Underbool Branch 


Ms Mary Chandler

RSCH.016.001.0517 

Appendices 

WARBURTON – 8 October 2007 

Mr John Schauble, Captain, Sassafras - Ferny Creek Brigade 


Mr Bernard Barbetti, Manager Fire & Emergency Services, Port Phillip 

Region 

Mr Peter Watkinson, Regional Manager, Port Phillip Region 


Ms Anna-Marie Shew 

Ferny Creek Fire Alert 

Ms Charmaine Quick, Manger Civil Assets 

Melbourne Water Corporation 

Ms Annie Volkering, Regional Manger, Melbourne Metropolitan 


Dr Patrick Lane, Senior Research Fellow, School of Forest and Ecosystem 

Science 

University of Melbourne 

Mr Glenn Hunt, Executive Officer Emergency and Safety Planning 

Mr Grant Jack, Manager Asset Maintenance and Services 

Yarra Ranges Shire Council 

Mr Gary Moran 

275

RSCH.016.001.0518 


Mr Richard Alder, General Manager 

National Aerial Firefighting Centre 

MELBOURNE – 19 November 2007 

Mr David de Jongh, Senior Forest Policy Analyst 

Ms Catherine Murphy, Chief Executive Officer 

National Association of Forest Industries 

Mr Tim Barker 

Mr Ian Hamilton 

Mr David Packham, OAM 

Prof. Peter Attiwill 

People's Review of Bushfires in Victoria Since 2003 & The Australian 

Centre 

Ms Rita Bentley, President 

Prospectors and Miners Association of Victoria 

Mr Gary Featherston, Chairman, Victorian Division 

The Institute of Foresters Australia 

Mr Philip Dalidakis, Executive Director 

Victorian Association of Forest Industries 

Ms Jenny Barnett, Research Officer 

Victorian National Parks Association 

Ms Joanne Butterworth – Gray, Chief Executive 

Victorian Wine Industry Association 

Mr Gary Lyttle, Chairman 

Mr Trevor Roche, Project Worker 

Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria 

Mr Luke Chamberlain, Forest Campaigner 

Wilderness Society 

276

RSCH.016.001.0519 

Appendices 

Mr Graeme Stoney 

Alpine and General Consultants 

MANSFIELD – 26 November 2007 

Mr Andrew Fairley, Chairman 

Alpine Resort Coordinating Council 

Mr Bob McNamara, Chairman 

Alpine Valley Vignerons 

Mr Roland Walhquist, General Manager 

Brown Brothers Wines 

Mr Ken Badham, Member, Mansfield Brigade 

Mr Doug Bain, Captain, Taminick Rural Fire Brigade 

Mr Russell Picton, Member, Goughs Bay Brigade 

Mr Robert Scott, Member, Benalla and District Fire Brigades Group 


Mr Lindsay Ingram, Secretary 

Howqua Hills Progress Association 

Mr David Maple, Chairman 

King Valley Vignerons 

Mr Charley Lovick 

Lovick Adventures 

Cr Sandie Jeffcoat, Deputy Mayor 

Mr Kevin Murphy, Senior Environmental Health Officer 

Mr David Roff, Chief Executive Officer 

Mansfield Shire Council 

Mr Bernard Young, Chief Executive Officer 

Plantations North East 

Mr Allen Ashworth 

Mr David Evans 

Mr Steve Lowe 

277

RSCH.016.001.0520 


MT BEAUTY – 28 November 2007 

Mr Bob Adams, Media Officer 

Mr Jack Hicks, Vice President 

Mr Allan Mull, Member 

Mr Neville Robinson, Member 

Alpine Conservation and Access Group 

Mr John Carter, Manager - Technical Services 

Mr Darryl Farmer, Fire Prevention Officer 

Alpine Shire Council 

Mr Alan Davies, General Manager / North East 

Mr Paul King, Operations Manager / Region 24 


Mr Peter Farrell, Fire Manager, North East 

Mr Kevin Ritchie, Regional Director, North East 



Mr Chris Rose, Manager, East 


Mr Jim Crebbin 

Mr Piers Hartley 

Mr Rob Martin 

Mr Peter McConachy 

Mr Martyn Paterson 

278

RSCH.016.001.0521 

Appendices 

OMEO – 29 November 2007 

Mr Gavin Hope, Operations Officer, Region 11 

Mr Peter Sandy, Ex- Omeo Group Officer 

Mr Graeme Symons, Group Officer, Omeo Group 

Mr Mack Stagg, Group Officer, Omeo Group 



Mr Ben Rankin, Senior Fire Management Officer 

Mr David Tainsh, Regional Fire Manager, Gippsland 



Mr Chris Commins 

Mr John Cook 

Mr Simon Turner 

Mountain Cattlemen's Association of Victoria 

Mr David Nugent, Deputy General Fire Manager, Fire and Emergency 

Services 


Mr Fraser Barry 

Mr John Somerville 

Mr Russell Rees, Chief Officer 


MELBOURNE – 7 April 2008 

Mr Peter Harris, Secretary 



Mr David Nugent, Deputy General Fire Manager, Fire and Emergency 

Services 


Mr David Pollard, Chief Executive Officer 

VicForests 

279

RSCH.016.001.0522 


Appendix 4 

Seminars and Conferences 

Bushfire in a Heating World 

Nature Conservation Council of NSW 

31 May to 1 June 2007 

Sydney, New South Wales 

A Southerly Change: Tassie Fire Conference 

Bushfire CRC and Australasian Fire Authorities Council 

20 September to 21 September 2007 

Hobart, Tasmania 

Community Participation in Land and Waterways Sustainability 

Victorian Employers’ Chamber of Commerce and Industry 

23 October 2007 

Melbourne, Victoria 

Crisis Media Awareness 

Tourism Victoria 



280

RSCH.016.001.0523 

Appendices 

Appendix 5 

Site Inspections and Briefings 


Department of Sustainability and Environment and the Country Fire 

Authority 

21 May 2007 

Kinglake, Victoria 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Parks Victoria and the 


18 June 2007 

Halls Gap, Victoria 



4 July 2007 

Dunkeld, Victoria 

Mr and Mrs Weatherly, and Mr Gunn 

5 July 2007 

Bairnsdale, Victoria 

Department of Sustainability and Environment and Parks Victoria 

31 July 2007 

Creswick, Victoria 

Department of Sustainability and Environment, Parks Victoria, the Country 

Fire Authority and Dr Kevin Tolhurst 

20 August 2007 

281

RSCH.016.001.0524 


Hattah Kulkyne National Park, Victoria 



11 September 2007 

Murray-Sunset National Park, Wyperfeld National Park and Big Desert 

Wilderness Park, Victoria 



2 September 2007 

Warburton, Victoria 



8 October 2007 

Mt Buller, Victoria 

Alpine Resort Co-ordinating Council and Country Fire Authority 

26 November 2007 

Howqua Hills, Victoria 

Mr and Mrs Stoney, Mr Lovick and Mr Ingram 


Mansfield/Myrtleford (various inspections), Victoria 


Fire Authority, Hancock Victorian Plantations, SP Ausnet and local wine 

growers 


282

RSCH.016.001.0525 

Appendices 

Myrtleford/Mt Beauty (various inspections), Victoria 


Fire Authority and AGL 


Mt Beauty/Omeo (various inspections), Victoria 


Fire Authority and Falls Creek Resort Management 


Wilsons Promontory National Park, Victoria 

Department of Sustainability and Environment and Parks Victoria 

5 March 2008 

Cann River, Victoria 

East Gippsland Wildfire Taskforce 

6 March 2008 

Licola, Victoria 

Licola Community 

7 March 20008 

Perth, Western Australia 

Department of Environment and Conservation 

18 March 2008 

283

RSCH.016.001.0526 

INQUIRY INTO THE IMPACT OF PUBLIC LAND MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON BUSHFIRES IN VICTORIA FINAL REPORT JUNE 2008 

ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE 

Parliament of Victoria, melbourne VIC 3002 T 8682 2803 F 8682 2818 www.parliament.vic.gov.au/enrc

Inquiry into the Impact of Public Land Management Practices

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?